Former P.E.I. director of child protection comes in for 'substantial criticism' in Supreme Court ruling

Prince Edward Island's former director of child protection comes under "substantial criticism" in a landmark Supreme Court of Canada child custody ruling involving a boy now living in southern Alberta, says a law professor familiar with the case. 

Rollie Thompson, who lectures on family law and child protection issues at the Schulich School of Law at Dalhousie University, says the department needs to engage in some self-reflection over the case. 

"People need to take a hard look at the actions in this case, and other cases of the [former] director of child protection," Thompson said in an interview with CBC News. 

"In this case, the director removed the child from the maternal grandmother and sent the child to the natural father who had not much — well, no relationship with the child at first — and they plainly put their thumb on the scales in favour of the natural father and against the maternal grandmother."

He said that approach "was rejected as a view by the trial judge and by the Supreme Court." 

Wendy McCourt was Prince Edward Island's director of child protection at the time of the events described in the Supreme Court of Canada ruling. 

She has since retired.

CBC News tried to reach her for comment about her actions as described in the ruling, but she did not return phone calls.

Officials with Child and Family Services said they cannot comment on specific cases, when CBC News requested an interview.

But an emailed statement said: "The cases and families that we work with often have multiple levels of complexity and our staff do not take any decisions involving children and families lightly. 

"These decisions are not made in silos, they are made with input from those connected personally and professionally with the child(ren) and family and in conjunction with professional clinical judgment that is always grounded in the best interest of the child."

Thompson challenges the province's statement that it cannot comment publicly on the case because of privacy issues.

"The director of child protection is a public official, acting in a public capacity, and at some point they cannot hide behind privacy and confidentiality arguments. 

"This isn't about what the parents did. This is about what the director of child protection did. And as a consequence, they're accountable to the courts and they are also accountable to the public and to the elected politicians.