IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

[1]           In this case, I must determine what is in the best interests of a 7-year-old boy named C.J.S. He was born on [omitted for publication] and his mother and father were only 17 and 18 years old, respectively, at the time.

[2]           The father, B.B., and the mother, A.S., did co-parent C. in his early years. However, as of October 2018, Mr. B. has been C.’s full time caregiver. He has a good support network for C. in Abbotsford, including his partner, his mother, and a long time daycare provider. C. is a bright young boy who excels in math and who loves nature walks.

[3]           At age 24, Ms. S.’s situation has significantly improved. She has the support of a community outreach worker, a domestic violence liaison, and her grandmother. She also co-parents a 2-year-old named M.

[4]           However, the mother’s life has been seriously affected by drug use, mental health difficulties, and some unfortunate choices. Ms. S. in fact has a hole in her septum from cocaine use. Her former drug dealing boyfriend broke her arm and nose, and he later torched her car. He is now bound by a peace bond.

[5]           Ms. S. was co-parenting C. up to October of 2018, although there were intervening events such as a Ministry safety plan in 2017 and earlier mental breakdowns. In October of 2018, Ms. S. was kicked out of her grandmother’s home, and C. and his brother spent one overnight in her car.

[6]           Since that time, Ms. S. was granted supervised visits with C., but she did not actually exercise those visits until September of 2019. She was recovering from the assault and she heavily used illicit drugs, resulting in her hospitalization in March of 2019.

[7]           This trial began in January of this year but did not conclude until June 23, 2020, largely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some court was conducted by phone, and I had the parties return in person at the earliest opportunity on June 23^rd to finish the evidence and get updates. Ms. S. has been self-represented throughout but a support person has appeared with her.

[8]           I will say at the outset that there is no doubt C. should remain in the primary care of his father. Ms. S. has conceded as much. The real issue is the mother’s parenting time with C.

[9]           Due to the drug issue and other concerns, Mr. B.’s first position is that the mother should continue to have visits in the community, supervised by someone such as her grandmother. He is open to a gradual move to unsupervised, longer visits.

[10]        Ms. S. has been forthright about many of her struggles, but Mr. B. remains troubled by her failure to provide a court ordered drug screen.

[11]        Ms. S. seeks a gradual increase in her parenting time. She wishes the parenting time to evolve to unsupervised overnight visits. She says C. should see more of his brother, M., and it is peculiar that she co-parents this 2-year-old while only exercising supervised visits with 7-year-old C. It is unclear if M.’s father is aware of all the mother’s history presented in this case.

[12]        I am governed only by the best interests of C. as set out in section 37 of the Family Law Act.

[13]        Ms. Quinlan is a senior community outreach worker with Encompass Support Services Society. She provides assistance to expectant mothers who are 25 years or younger living in the Langley area.

[14]        On July 3, 2013, Ms. Quinlan received a referral for Ms. S. who was looking for housing. C. was then three and one half months old. Ms. Quinlan helped Ms. S. obtain rental assistance and a learner’s driver’s licence. In 2013, Ms. S. had secured an apartment in Aldergrove, and the premises were generally observed to be clean.

[15]        In 2013, Ms. Quinlan did not observe any parenting concerns with Ms. S., and Mr. B. also exercised parenting time.

[16]        Ms. Quinlan had not seen the mother’s apartment in 2016 when it was in deplorable shape as shown in the photographs at Exhibit 4, tabs 3 and 10. C.’s room then contained boxes full of dirty diapers, and there were baggies of drugs in the premises.

[17]        In October of 2018, Ms. Quinlan strongly suspected that Ms. S. was using drugs. She saw Ms. S.’s pupils “hopping”, and Ms. S. admitted to drug use. Her housing and employment were unstable.

[18]        In January and February of 2019, Ms. S. was in a stressful situation. She suffered a broken arm and broken nose at the hands of a violent partner, B.C. Mr. B.C. was not only abusive, he was a drug dealer. During this time, Ms. S.’s younger child, M., went to stay with the paternal family in Kamloops.

[19]        More recently, Ms. Quinlan observed that Ms. S.’s situation had greatly improved. She was advised that Ms. S. had been clean since March 22, 2019, and she had not suspected any drug use since that time. Ms. S. was taking her medication for her mental health, she had put on weight, and she looked healthier.

[20]        Visitation is not part of Ms. Quinlan’s role, but she has no recent concerns with Ms. S. visiting C. Ms. S. lives with her grandmother in Surrey, and she now co-parents M. Ms. Quinlan has not seen C. since he was three years old. She was not aware that Ms. S. had her driver’s licence suspended.

[21]        Ms. Candline is a woman’s support worker and domestic violence liaison with Ishtar Women’s Resource Society. She supports women who are fleeing domestic violence and who may have Ministry of Children and Family Development involvement.

[22]        Ms. Candline first met Ms. S. in January of 2019, when Ms. S was staying at a transition house. Ms. S. had been assaulted by Mr. B.C. She had a cast on her arm and she appeared “beaten down” physically and emotionally. She was very skinny and looked in rough shape.

[23]        Ms. Candline worked with Ms. S. again in October of 2019 as a domestic violence liaison. The Ministry was concerned both about domestic violence and drug use. Ms. Candline worked on a relapse prevention plan with Ms. S., who actually got clean on her own. The relapse prevention plan involved Ms. S. remaining connected to supports like Ms. Quinlan and Ms. Candline, staying on her medication, and avoiding triggers such as abusive relationships.

[24]        Ms. S. was not enrolled in a specific drug rehabilitation programme. Ms. Candline understood that the Ministry had clean drug screens for Ms. S. and that she was 300 days clean as of January 14, 2020. Ms. Candline was seeing Ms. S. weekly.

[25]        In October of 2019, Ms. Candline saw a huge improvement in Ms. S. She was happier and more confident, and she was taking medication for her mental health. Ms. Candline could see no reason why Ms. S.’s visits with C. required supervision. Ms. Candline has seen Ms. S. with M., and she is a loving and caring mother.

[26]        Ms. S. is the mother of C. who is now 7 years old and M. who is now 2 years old.

[27]        Ms. S. was only 17 when C. was born in [omitted for publication] of 2013. She and Mr. B. were in an on again/off again relationship for about 4 years, and the longest they lived together was from October to December 2013. They separated for the last time in 2016.

[28]        Ms. S. agreed that C. was often at the home of Mr. B.’s parents for the first year of his life. She also acknowledged that she used illicit drugs as early as 2015, but C. was either at the B.’s home or her grandmother’s home when she was using. Between 2014 to 2016 she was suffering from bipolar disorder, and this partially explains the poor state of her apartment during that time. Mr. B.’s mother was very involved with C. at that time.

[29]        In August of 2016, Ms. S. had been drugged by someone at the Pemberton Music Festival, and Mr. B. assisted her. She was staying at his home for a brief period. Ms. S. had both a bipolar episode and she was using cocaine. Some of her texts at tab 9 of Exhibit 4 are concerning and reflect a lifestyle of drug use during this period.

[30]        Mr. B. became romantically involved with M.C. in the later summer of 2016, and the parties’ relationship then came to an end. In 2017, due to the friction between the parties, Mr. B.’s mother became involved in the exchanges of C.

[31]        By the terms of the August 15, 2017 Order the parties shared all parental responsibilities and Mr. B. had parenting time Thursday to Sunday of each week. However, the Ministry did intervene in late August of 2017 as social workers felt that Ms. S.’s home with her mother was not appropriate for C. A safety plan was put in place requiring Ms. S. to secure alternative living arrangements and to provide a drug screen.

[32]        On September 12, 2017, the court granted Mr. B. all the parenting responsibilities and parenting time for C. Ms. S. said she missed the court date. She then had supervised visits or FaceTime visits with C.

[33]        By the January 26, 2018 Order, Ms. S. had weekend parenting time supervised by her mother, and under the March 13, 2018 Order, she had specified unsupervised visits. The April 3, 2018 Order granted Ms. S. parenting time Monday to Wednesday of each week, and this evolved to Monday to Thursday under the July 13, 2018 Order.

[34]        Ms. S. gave birth to M. on [omitted for publication]. During the pregnancy, Ms. S. admitted to using cocaine once in January of 2018 during a suicide attempt. She did resume cocaine use after M.’s birth in [omitted for publication] of 2018 when she had postpartum depression.

[35]        At the beginning of October 2018, Ms. S. spent one night in her car with both C. and M. C. was then 5 years old. Ms. S. was homeless because her grandmother had asked her to leave the home. Ms. S. says the boys were safe and fed, but C. did miss 2 days of school. C. was returned to the daycare on October 4, 2018, and Ms. S. was not aware that C. had soiled underwear. It should also be noted that in a text to the daycare provider, Ms. S. admits that she had a hole in her septum from her past love of cocaine.

[36]        As a result of these events, Mr. B. obtained a protection order on October 5, 2018, and he was granted all parenting time. Ms. S. was to have parenting time only as consented to by Mr. B. The protection order was obtained without notice, and Ms. S. thought it was excessive.

[37]        On January 8, 2019, Ms. S. was granted supervised visits once per week through the Ann Davis Society. Nevertheless, due to a number of factors, Ms. S. did not visit with C. between October of 2018 and September of 2019.

[38]        Mr. B. was granted primary residence of C. on June 24, 2019. I granted that order, and I did hear from Social Worker Bacon at that time. Ms. Bacon indicated that Ms. S. looked healthier, she was on medication, and she had gained weight. However, the ministry had no recent drug screen.

[39]        Ms. S. had a 5 month relationship with Mr. B.C. and he became violent. He was also a drug dealer. He assaulted her in January of 2019, breaking her wrist, her collarbone, her nose, 3 of her ribs and her cheekbone. Mr. B.C. was arrested on January 11, 2019. Ms. S. felt that Mr. B.C. posed a risk even to Mr. B. He torched her car in the spring of 2019. He is now subject to a peace bond with a no contact order which expires October 4, 2020.

[40]        Ms. S. asked M.’s father to care for M. in the Kamloops area while she recovered. Following the assault, Ms. S. admitted she had a serious problem with cocaine and other drugs. She intentionally overdosed on March 21 and 22, 2019, and she was treated at Peace Arch Hospital.

[41]        Due to the assault and these other issues, Ms. S. did not attempt to exercise supervised visits with C. until September of 2019. She had intended to attend the Ann Davis Society on July 23, 2020, but she got in a car accident on the way there. Her visits at Ann Davis began in September of 2019 with C. alone, and she wished C. could have seen his brother whom he adores.

[42]        Even after September of 2019, Ms. S. missed a number of visits because she could not get a sitter for M. or had vehicle issues. The cost and the travel to the Chilliwack supervision site impeded her ability to attend. Ms. S.’s last visit at Ann Davis was December 10, 2020. According to the visit reports, the visits generally went well, and Ms. S. did speak highly of Mr. B. during the visits.

[43]        When this trial began in January of this year, I was concerned that Ms. S. had not seen C. since December 10, 2019, but I appreciated the need for supervision given Ms. S.’s past drug use and tumultuous lifestyle. On January 17, 2020, I ordered three specified evening visits to be within 5 kilometres of the Aldergrove public library. Ms. S.’s grandmother, M.S., was to be present at all times, and M. could also attend the visit. I also ordered that if Ms. S. did not provide a recent drug test, I was at liberty to draw an adverse inference. Ms. S. did miss one visit as she had a jaw infection.

[44]        I made a similar order on February 5^th of this year so that seven further visits would continue in the same manner. Ms. S. was to ensure C. was in a booster seat, as there was a concern that he was once transported by cab without one. At that time, Mr. B. agreed to pay for Ms. S.’s drug testing by way of hair analysis, but she never did engage in such testing.

[45]        On March 24, 2020, I ordered phone or FaceTime visits Tuesday evenings given the COVID-19 concerns. On June 15, I restored the Aldergrove library visits with the grandmother present for Tuesday evenings, and phone/FaceTime visits for Thursday evenings.

[46]        Ms. S. testified about the many steps she has taken in her recovery from drug addiction. She said she is now clean some 15 months. The children have never seen her high. Dr. Kegel is her psychiatrist, and in her letter dated January 10, 2020 she stated Ms. S. “has done exceptionally well with her recovery and her sobriety and has been attending appointments and has been compliant with medications since March 2019”.

[47]        Ms. S. is taking 7 different medications to address anxiety, depression and schizophrenia. She has been diagnosed with a panic disorder, a bipolar disorder, and a form of schizophrenia complicated by her drug use.

[48]        In addition to the support of Ms. Quinlan and Ms. Candline, Ms. S. has the support of her mother and grandmother. She is living with her grandmother in White Rock with M. on a shared parenting basis.

[49]        Ms. S. is now 24 years old, and she says she has matured. Her nose was “ruined” by drugs, and a motor vehicle accident also shattered her jaw. She points out that when she first met Mr. B., he did push her and he did use cocaine.

[50]        Ms. S. was a supervisor with Boston Pizza, but that work stopped due to COVID-19. She is now working at a tattoo studio and part-time at a Harley Davidson dealership. Her grandmother or her mother can provide daycare while she is at work. She is also working on a midwifery degree through UBC.

[51]        Ms. S. had some friction with the father’s daycare provider, L.W., but she agrees C. gets along well with her. Ms. S. says she now has no issues with the father’s partner, Ms. C.

[52]        Ms. S. plans on moving to Aldergrove, nearer to C. She said she was moving March 1, 2020, but she now says she is moving in July of this year. Ms. S. agreed that there were baggies of drugs in her Aldergrove apartment in 2016, but she moved out in August of 2017.

[53]        Ms. S. indicated that she received a conditional discharge in May of 2019 for a theft under charge, and she said she is on a driving curfew for driving while suspended. She did not bring to court any proof that she in fact had a valid driver’s licence.

[54]        M. is now 2 years old and he is meeting his milestones. Ms. S. states that M.’s father was the primary caregiver for M. following the assault, but they now share care of him. The Ministry was involved with M., but they have no present concerns with Ms. S.’s care of him. The father of M. lives in Kamloops and the exchanges occur in Hope. Ms. M. did not bring any court documents concerning M.

[55]        C. is a smart, funny and loving boy. He has a good vocabulary. Ms. S. concedes that C. is doing well at his father’s home, and he has no behavioural issues. He does express disappointment about not seeing his mom.

[56]        Ms. S. believes her visits should not be supervised, as she says she has been clean since March of 2019. There has never been an allegation that she abuses her children. Initially, she would be content to visit C. with his brother in the community during the day. She would then like to move to overnight visits. Her ultimate goal is to co-parent C.

[57]        Ms. W. has been a daycare provider for C. since early in 2014. She knows both parents quite well. She now cares for C. from Monday to Friday between 7:00 am and 5:00 pm, and she takes C. to school. Mr. B. pays the daycare fees.

[58]        When Ms. W. dealt with Ms. S. in the past, there were issues about non-payment for C.’s care and M.’s care. In October of 2018, Ms. S. did send Ms. W. a text saying she had a hole in her septum from her past love of cocaine.

[59]        It was in the beginning of October, 2018, when Ms. W. did not see C. between Monday evening and Thursday afternoon. Needless to say, this was concerning. Ms. W. later learned that Ms. S. was living out of her car with C. and M. for some of that time. On the Monday, Ms. S. slouched in the car while her friend picked up C. from the daycare. The next day, Ms. S. did not look healthy when she picked up M.’s stroller. Ms. S. did not respond to messages on the Wednesday, and on Thursday, she dropped off C. when he was supposed to be in school. C. was very hungry and he was eating some KFC chicken. C. had soiled his pants. Mr. B. became the primary caregiver of M. following this incident.

[60]        C. loves being at Ms. W.’s daycare, and he appears to be meeting his milestones. The daycare is across the street from the elementary school.

[61]        J. B. is the mother of Mr. B. and the paternal grandmother of C. C. was born in [omitted for publication] of 2013, and he lived in her home until October or November of that year. Her son lived there and Ms. S. primarily lived there.

[62]        As of November of 2013, Mr. B. and Ms. S. lived apart and they co-parented C. Ms. B. would see C. during her son’s parenting time from Thursday to Sunday of each week. This arrangement continued until 2016 when her son moved to Vancouver Island for a brief time, but Ms. B. cared for C. during her son’s parenting time.

[63]        In August of 2017, Ms. B. believed the Ministry had removed C. from Ms. S.’s care, but in fact the Ministry had arranged a safety plan due to housing and drug concerns. In 2017, Ms. B. also became the main person to communicate with Ms. S. as there was friction between Ms. S. and both Mr. B. and his girlfriend. Ms. B. felt the parties became less civil after Ms. S. withheld C. in the summer of 2017.

[64]        When Ms. S. lived in Aldergrove, Ms. B. would often assist Ms. S. with cleaning her apartment. Ms. B. described the apartment as being in a terrible state. Soiled diapers were in C.’s bedroom, there were dirty dishes all over the kitchen, and food had gone bad. Ms. B. went to Ms. S.’s apartment and cleaned dishes, took garbage to the dumpster and picked up half empty glasses. Ms. S. was also not reliable attending her parenting time between January and June of 2017.

[65]        Ms. B. described how her son loves and cares for C. He packs C. a lunch each day and helps with his spelling tests. He ensures C. attends dental appointments. His partner, M.C., has stepped into the mother’s role.

[66]        Ms. C. is Mr. B.’s common law partner, and their relationship began in August of 2016. Ms. C. got acquainted with C. then but became more of a mother figure in 2018. She would help C. get ready for school, feed him, and console him when needed. C. calls her “Mom” and he calls Ms. S. “Mommy.”

[67]        C. is doing well in school and he is exceeding expectations in math. He started kindergarten in September of 2018. He is artistic and knows a lot about dinosaurs.

[68]        In the Fall of 2016, Ms. S.’s interactions with Ms. C. were becoming abrupt and uncivil. Ms. S.’s text messages with Mr. B. were intense and filled with phrases such as “Thanks B. Hope you drop dead” or “Get fucked”. Ms. C. kept track of Ms. S.’s missed visits on a calendar.

[69]        When C. was returned to the daycare in October of 2018 after spending overnight in Ms. S.’s vehicle, he had a horrendous smell and his hair was a mess. C. told Ms. C. he slept in the vehicle in a Walmart parking lot with his brother and his mother. His underwear was soiled with feces. Ms. C. described C. as distraught.

[70]        According to Ms. C., C. adjusted well to his father becoming the primary caregiver after this incident. C. is now more outgoing and he does not have emotional breakdowns. When Ms. S. did not see C. between October of 2018 and September of 2019, C. rarely mentioned her.

[71]        When the professionally supervised visits began in September of 2019, C. sometimes would not want to attend the visits. Ms. S. cancelled visits several times for reasons such as a blown tire, food poisoning, and lack of a babysitter for M. Ultimately, Ms. S. did not pay her cancellation fees, and her last Ann Davis visit was December 10, 2019.

[72]        As discussed above, I granted Ms. S. visits in the community with her grandmother present in January of 2020. C. was quite emotional after his first visit. Following the second visit, there was a concern that C. was transported by taxi without a car seat. The third visit was cancelled by Ms. S.

[73]        Mr. B. is C.’s father, and he was 18 years old when C. was born in [omitted for publication] of 2013.

[74]        From about November of 2013 onwards, C. spent half of his time at the home of Mr. B.’s parents, and half the time at Ms. S.’s home in Aldergrove. Previously, Ms. S. had lived with her mother who was a hoarder and a drinker. Mr. B. says Ms. S. never had guidance on how to clean a household.

[75]        In 2015, Mr. B. went to Vancouver Island and he came home on weekends. As previously mentioned, his parents assumed his parenting time with C. Mr. B. has photographs of Ms. S.’s apartment in Aldergrove in 2016. Soiled diapers were in a cardboard box, and the bathroom was full of cat waste. Clothes and beverages were strewn all over the floor. Mr. B. and his family would quite often go over and clean up the apartment.

[76]        In August of 2016, Mr. B. went to the Pemberton Music Festival to pick up Ms. S. and to help her with her drug problem. Ms. S. did stay at Mr. B.’s residence, but she was suicidal and was also hospitalized. Photographs show baggies of drugs in Ms. S.’s apartment.

[77]        Sometime after Mr. B. met Ms. C. in 2016, his mother took over communication with Ms. S. so as to ease the tension. Ms. S. had earlier thrown a drink during a visit exchange when Ms. C. was present.

[78]        As set out in the August 15, 2017 order, Mr. B. was exercising parenting time to C. from Thursdays to Sundays. This order came about after Ms. S. had withheld C.

[79]        In August of 2017, the Ministry became concerned about Ms. S.’s living arrangements and her drug use. A safety plan was put in place, and Ms. S. was to engage in drug testing. Mr. B. was aware that Ms. S. had tested positive for cocaine use. On September 12, 2017, Mr. B. was granted all of the parenting time for C. Ms. S. had some FaceTime visits but they were cancelled after November of 2017.

[80]        On January 26, 2018, Ms. S. was ordered to have parenting time supervised by her grandmother, as well as FaceTime visits. From March to October of 2018, Ms. S.’s parenting time increased and was unsupervised. By the order granted April 3, 2018, Ms. S. had parenting time from Monday to Wednesday of each week.

[81]        At the beginning of October, 2018, the daycare provider, Ms. W., told Mr. B. that C. had not been in school, and Mr. B. learned that C. had been staying overnight in Ms. S.’s car. Mr. B. obtained the protection order on October 5, 2018, and Ms. S. was only allowed visits with Mr. B.’s consent. Mr. B. was very concerned that Ms. S. chose to have C. stay in a car overnight rather than choosing to drop him off at his father’s stable home. When Mr. B. picked up C., he was distraught and hungry.

[82]        On January 8, 2019, Ms. S. was granted professionally supervised visits with the Ann Davis Society, but no visits occurred until September 10, 2019. Ms. S. did not see C. for close to 11 months. According to Mr. B., C. rarely brought up the topic of his mother, and he was doing well.

[83]        In September of 2019, the supervised visits began with Ann Davis, but Ms. S. missed 8 or 9 visits. For many of these missed visits, Mr. B. would drive C. from Abbotsford to Chilliwack, and the missed visits were hard on C.

[84]        Even with my recent court orders for visits and phone calls, Ms. S. has missed visits, and C. blames himself on these occasions. There have been 2 missed phone calls without any notice.

[85]        C. is doing well in school and he completed online assignments during the COVID-19 pandemic. At the beginning of the pandemic, Ms. C. was at home to care for C. C. loves Pokémon, Nintendo, and nature walks. He has learned to ride a bike.

[86]        Ms. S. falsely accused Mr. B. of sexual abuse in 2017, and he has no criminal record. He paid child support to Ms. S. in the past when required.

[87]        Mr. B. seeks to continue having primary care of C. He still believes Ms. S.’s parenting time should be supervised by M.S. or another adult he consents to. The mother’s visits should be 2 hours per week, but in closing argument, he was open to expanding the time. Ms. S. has used drugs most of her adult life, and Mr. B. suspects she is still using because she refuses to do a drug test. The Ministry has been involved, and Ms. S. makes bad choices - like having C. live in a car. There is also no proof she has a valid driver’s licence.

[88]        When making any decision concerning C., my only focus is his best interests as defined in s.37 of the Family Law Act. I should consider the needs and circumstances of C., including his health and emotional well-being, the nature and strength of the relationships between C. and significant other persons, his history of care and need for stability, and the abilities of the parents to be parents.

[89]        As I have already discussed, C. ought to remain in the primary care of his father. By all accounts - even the mother’s - C. is thriving at his father’s home, and he has further support from Ms. C., his paternal grandmother, and his daycare provider.

[90]        C. has adjusted well to Mr. B. becoming his primary caregiver, and this situation has been in place for close to 2 years now. C. is doing well in school and is less prone to emotional breakdowns. He has a stable and well-established routine with his father and Ms. C. Unfortunately, Ms. S. could not provide the same degree of stability for C. given her past drug use, the abuse she suffered at the hands of Mr. B.C., and her somewhat chaotic lifestyle overall.

[91]        The real issue here is Ms. S.’s parenting time with C. Ms. S.’s battle with drug addiction and her mental health, and the choices she has made, have affected C. and, undoubtedly, M. as well. In 2016, Ms. S. suffered a breakdown following the Pemberton Music Festival, and her Aldergrove apartment was in a deplorable state. C. was living in unsanitary conditions and baggies of drugs were in his home.

[92]        In 2017, the Ministry imposed a safety plan on Ms. S. due to housing and drug concerns. In October of 2018, Ms. S. chose to have her young boys live in a car overnight, and C. was distraught, unclean and, quite frankly, harmed by this experience. Even now, Ms. S.’s missed visits do upset C., and she was largely absent from his life between late 2018 and September of 2019.

[93]        However, I accept that Ms. S. has come a long way. I base that finding on the observations of the community outreach worker, the domestic violence liaison and others. She looks healthier, she has gained weight, and she is addressing her mental health. Her psychiatrist’s letter is positive, although I consider that evidence to be a medical record of the mother’s compliance with appointments and medication rather than some ironclad guarantee of sobriety.

[94]        I appreciate that Ms. S.’s current use of drugs is a burning issue, and I address that below. Nevertheless, Ms. S.’s housing with her grandmother is stable and secure, although she may be moving to be closer to C.

[95]        Moreover, Ms. S. has been co-parenting a 2-year-old, and even if M.’s father has not been apprised of all of Ms. S.’s difficulties, the Ministry is not currently involved.

[96]        I conclude that it is in C.’s best interests to have a meaningful relationship with his mother and his little brother. However, the mother’s parenting time must be exercised in a safe and careful manner so that it complements the progress C. has made in his father’s care.

[97]        The following concerns must be recognized in structuring Ms. S.’s parenting time:

[98]        Based on the above analysis of C.’s best interests, these are my orders:

[99]        All prior orders in this proceeding are cancelled.

[100]     Upon the court being advised the name and the birthdate of the child are as follows: C.J.S., born [omitted for publication].

[101]     The Court is satisfied that B.J.B. and A.R.S. are guardians of the child under s. 39(1) of the Family Law Act.

[102]     B.J.B. will have the following parental responsibilities under s. 41 of the Family Law Act allocated to him:

[103]     The parents will share the following parental responsibilities:

[104]     B.J.B. will have primary care of the child.

[105]     Upon providing 2 weeks notice to A.R.S., B.J.B. will have 2 weeks of continuous parenting time with the child, twice per year.

[106]     A.R.S. will have parenting time as follows:

[107]     A.R.S. will notify B.J.B. 24 hours in advance for any cancellation of her parenting time.

[108]     A.R.S. will not have overnight parenting time until she has provided B.J.B. with a clean drug screen by way of hair analysis going back 3 months. If there is a dispute about this term, either party may apply for directions and Judge Brown is seized of such an application.

[109]     A.R.S. will ensure C. will only be driven by someone possessing a valid driver’s licence.

[110]     A.R.S. will ensure B.C. has no contact with C. or his brother, M.