The Courts' Stance on the Integrity of the Family Unit
The Courts have repeatedly held that the best interests of a child lie within the family unit, and that the integrity of this unit should not be disrupted without strong justification.
“It is, I think of the utmost importance that questions involving the custody of infants be approached with a clear view of the governing considerations. That view cannot be less than this: prima facie the natural parents are entitled to custody unless by reason of some act, condition or circumstance affecting them it is evident that the welfare of the child requires that that fundamental natural relation be severed...
— Justice Rand, Hepton et al. v. Maat et al., [1957] S.C.R. 606, 10 D.L.R. (2d) 1
In Re Mugford [1970] 1 O.R. 601, Mr. Justice Schroeder wrote:
“The child’s welfare lies first in the security of the home of its natural parents, and it is only when that protection cannot be furnished, with or without fault of the parents, that the State is justified in assuming duties of parenthood to the exclusion of the natural parents.”
“One cannot over-estimate the importance to a child of living... in an environment shared by its own blood kin... The law is on the side of the natural parents unless for grave reasons... the Court sees fit not to give effect to the parents’ wishes.”
In Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton v. J.I., 2006 CanLII 19432 (ON SC), Justice Stayshyn noted:
“[38] Thus, I have taken care to avoid judging the mother by a ‘middle class yardstick’...”
“[39]... if those standards conform to those considered average in a particular class or group... a court ought not to interfere.”
“[46] The appropriate standard of parenting is not perfection... Rather, it is the minimum allowable standard... to ensure that the best interests of the child are met...”
Society's Duties and the Importance of Procedural Fairness
In Children’s Aid Society of Waterloo Region v. B.-C. (Z), 1996 CanLII 4742 (ONCJ), Justice Katarynych outlined the expectations of a society’s conduct:
- Conducting a thorough investigation before launching court proceedings.
- Seeking corroboration or independent evidence beyond allegations.
- Allowing the accused parent to be heard, involve counsel, and respond to allegations.
- Remaining open to all versions of events, including that of the accused.
- Staying alert to potential bias or rancour behind allegations.
- Continuing investigation and reassessment as more information becomes available — even during court hearings.
- Reviewing all relevant evidence, not just what is uncontroverted.
The Impact of Child Apprehension
In Children’s Aid Society of Algoma v. R.S., 2013 ONCJ 688, Justice Kukurin commented:
“[22] There is a disturbing casualness surrounding the apprehension of G... The removal of a child from the care of his or her primary caregiver... is the single most significant step in the entire child protection regime...”
“This is the epitome of disruption... Little wonder that the statute authorizing apprehension... contains some significant checks and balances.”
.svg)