B.C. grandparents claim religious discrimination after cult allegations raised in custody case

A child holds an adult's hand in this undated stock photo. (Pixabay/Pexels.com)

B.C. grandparents who claimed they faced religious discrimination when seeking custody of their grandchild because the child protection ministry considered allegations they were affiliated with an abusive cult have had their case dismissed.

The province’s Human Rights Tribunal published its decision on the matter Tuesday, outlining some of the lengthy process of deciding who would get custody of a child who was apprehended from her parents when she was six weeks old in 2017.

The grandparents, who are not named to protect the identity of the child, filed a complaint against the Ministry of Children and Family Development after they adopted their granddaughter in 2021.

“They say that MCFD denied them guardianship of their grandchild based on an erroneous belief that the grandparents were members of a religious cult which encouraged the sexual exploitation and abuse of children,” reads the tribunal’s decision to dismiss the complaint.

The ministry argued the case should be dismissed on several grounds, including that any delay in placing the child with the grandparents was reasonable and justified due “legitimate concerns for the safety of the grandchild and its legal obligations to prioritize her safety and wellbeing.”

What the tribunal heard

According to the decision, before the child was born, her mother told a social worker that the child’s father was grew up in a “cult” and “believed children should be encouraged to engage in sexual relations.” The father denied having such beliefs but did tell an MCFD worker that he was raised in a group called the Family International.

“He stated that there had been allegations of child abuse by members of the Family International but that such abuse was not ‘condoned by the group as a whole,’” the decision said.

After the child was taken into state care, MCFD began what it calls the “family-finding” process, which involved locating relatives of the child to see if any would be potential candidates for providing the baby with a permanent home, according to the tribunal.

When the grandparents put themselves forward, the parents objected. However, MCFD began looking into the option.

“At that time, the grandparents told MCFD that they had been but were no longer a part of the Family International,” the decision said.

“The grandparents acknowledge that the Family International was accused of child abuse or condoning sex with minors, but they say that the Family International ‘was never found guilty of these charges.’ They say that they would not condone any religious practices that would be harmful to children,” the decision continued.

As part of its assessment, MCFD also looked into whether the grandparents had any history of ministry involvement – and found a number of reports from the 1980s and 1990s when the grandparents were raising their 11 children.

They included “allegations of inadequate living conditions” as well as “reports related to the children soliciting donations for the Family International” and “concerns about the family’s involvement with the Family International,” according to the decision. An additional report relayed a rumour that the kids were forced to provide “sexual favours to lure people into their cult,” the decision said.

While all the files were closed, the ministry found they posed a “concern” when it came to custody of the grandchild. Ultimately, MCFD decided not to grant the grandparents temporary custody in 2017 on a number of grounds, including an ongoing court battle involving the child’s parents.

The parents spent roughly a year and a half challenging the court order permanently removing their baby from their care – pursuing unsuccessful appeals up to the Supreme Court of Canada. A decision about permanent custody, the tribunal’s decision explained, could not be made until all appeals were exhausted.

The child remained in foster care in the meantime, but the grandparents were allowed visits. Ultimately, the grandparents applied as potential permanent guardians of the child, passed all of the relevant background checks, and adopted the child in June of 2021.

Case dismissed

To prove discrimination, the tribunal’s decision explained, the grandparents would have to show not only that their religious beliefs played a part in delaying a decision on custody, but that there was no justification for that delay.

“I am satisfied that even if the grandparents’ perceived religious beliefs were a factor in the decision to withhold temporary custody of the grandchild, those perceived religious beliefs, along with other factors, gave rise to MCFD’s concern about the safety and wellbeing of the grandchild,” Dean wrote.

“MCFD is reasonably certain to prove that the actions it took regarding those concerns were justified.”

The tribunal also rejected the grandparents’ argument that MCFD’s actions were “guided by stereotypes or assumptions” that their religious beliefs made them a danger to the child.

“MCFD had credible information that an organization that the Grandparents had been or were affiliated with encouraged child sexual abuse,” the decision said.

“The ministry was at all times properly focused on the impact that the grandparents’ perceived religious affiliation may have on the grandchild and were not operating from stereotype.”