Your search
Results 12 resources
-
Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.
-
Expert evidence from mental health professionals and medical doctors can play a central role in child welfare cases, and this evidence needs to be carefully scrutinized before it is relied upon in making critical decisions about the future of parent-child relationships. In Ontario, concern about the reliability of expert evidence in child abuse and neglect cases was heightened by the 2014 decision of the Court of Appeal in R v. Broomfield, where a mother’s conviction on criminal charges related to giving her infant child cocaine based on testimony by an expert from the Motherisk Drug Testing Lab at the Toronto Hospital for Sick Children. In overturning the conviction, the Court of Appeal noted that “the trial judge made her decision unaware of the genuine controversy among the experts about the use of the testing methods relied upon by the Crown expert at trial to found a conclusion of chronic cocaine ingestion.” In the months following the Court of Appeal decision in Broomfield, the Attorney General of Ontario appointed a former justice of the Court of Appeal, Susan Lang, to undertake a Review to assess the adequacy and reliability of hair analysis evidence used in child protection and criminal proceedings (report to be released Dec. 15, 2015).
-
Ontario residents are more likely to have a dispute concerning a familial relationship than any other type of serious legal problem.¹ The family dispute resolution process has evolved considerably over the past few decades, but the pace of change has been frustratingly slow, with many sound reports and recommendations for reform ignored, resulting in continuing unaddressed concerns about the family justice system. Many of those embroiled in these often traumatic, life-altering disputes have difficulties gaining access to the justice system and must proceed without adequate legal advice and assistance. The 2010 Law Commission of Ontario Report on the ‘broken’ family
-
The dominant philosophy in family court emphasizes cooperative solutions between separating parents who are encouraged to put their conflicts behind them. For the majority of separating families, this collaborative approach will best serve their children. However, cases involving domestic violence require a paradigm shift, with a greater focus on making a parenting plan that protects victims and children, and less emphasis on speedy, cooperative outcomes. This paper presents a framework for addressing domestic violence through a tiered assessment strategy and an accompanying intervention framework depicted by off-ramps from a freeway (as an analogy in this case to the substantial momentum towards collaborative settlements). These off-ramps for domestic violence and high-conflict cases do not suggest a one-size-fits-all solution within these categories; rather, they mark a departure point from which a wide range of solutions may be considered. Policy and practice implications of this paradigm shift are highlighted.
Explore
Resource type
- Book (2)
- Book Section (1)
- Journal Article (8)
- Preprint (1)
Publication year
-
Between 2000 and 2026
-
Between 2000 and 2009
(2)
- 2009 (2)
- Between 2010 and 2019 (9)
-
Between 2020 and 2026
(1)
- 2020 (1)
-
Between 2000 and 2009
(2)