Human Resources Committee on Nov. 27th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

I would remind members to keep their comments to the debate at hand, on the motion. We're currently debating the amendment of Mr. Fragiskatos.

Seeing no further debate, I will call for a recorded vote on the amendment of Mr. Fragiskatos.

Mr. Clerk, please read the amendment, and then we will go to a vote on the amendment.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Jacques Maziade]

The amendment is as follows: “appear before the committee for no fewer than one hour each, in two panels of three, to consider the supplementary estimates (B)”.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

We'll have a recorded vote on the motion of Ms. Gray as amended.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Actually, we only have three minutes left of the first round. I will go to Mr. Van Bynen to conclude the first hour with Ms. Falk on Bill C-318.

Go ahead, Mr. Van Bynen.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to move away from the politics of this discussion and talk about the merits of the bill.

I do commend you for bringing this bill forward.

As my first question, how would the bill create parity for adoptive parents and intended parents of children born through surrogacy and how do the attachment needs of children born through surrogacy differ from those of other adopted children?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Thank you very much, MP Van Bynen, for that question.

It will add the additional 15 weeks so that adoptive parents or intended parents who have a child through surrogacy will be able to get those benefits.

What was your second question?

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

How would the attachment needs of children born through surrogacy differ from those of other adopted children?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Well, attachment is attachment. I said previously that it doesn't matter what age. That first year within placement or birth is so very critical for health and development, specifically in regard of attachment to that child. It helps them feel safe and secure, helps with resiliency skills and helps with development, not only physically but also mentally and cognitively.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you.

How was it determined that 15 weeks was an appropriate length of time for the attachment benefit?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Attachment is lifelong. It's not just “one year, 365 days and the job's done”. Attachment is something that needs to be constant. The first year, of course, is very critical, as I have said numerous times, especially when we are looking at children who may have experienced trauma. It's important to have that time with their family to work through that, to help them feel comfortable, safe and secure. There isn't just a number: “Oh, 365 days: Check. I'm attached. I'm good.” It's something that continually goes on and on.

In parenting specifically, that's why we definitely want to have an attachment with our children once they get into those teenage years when kids sometimes have more difficult experiences in schools and such. It's good to have that attachment and bond secured so that parents can be there to help guide their children, have conversations with them and grow their relationship with them throughout life.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

What is the rationale for only providing this benefit in the week in which the child is placed, rather than much earlier?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

We mirrored the current existing legislation.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm probably out of time, am I?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You have one minute if you have a question for Mrs. Falk. We have reached the one-hour time, but if you have one more question for Mrs. Falk....

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

No, I'm fine. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

With that, thank you, Mrs. Falk, for appearing for the first hour as a witness on Bill C-318. Do you have any closing comments?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Thank you very much, Chair and committee, for having me here to explain the bill. I sincerely hope that I have everybody's support on this going forward, and that there is a miracle and the Liberals decide to give a royal recommendation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Falk.

With that, we will suspend for a few moments while we prepare for the second hour of witness testimony on Bill C-318. We'll suspend for three minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

The three minutes have passed and we're ready to resume with the second hour and witness testimony on Bill C-318.

We have with us, in person in the room, Julie Despaties, executive director of Adopt4Life.

We also have with us Ms. Anne‑Marie Morel, president of the Fédération des parents adoptants du Québec.

Ms. Despaties, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Julie Despaties, Executive Director, Adopt4Life]

Thank you for having me here today.

Adopt4Life was founded in 2014 and provides education, advocacy and community to the tapestry of families connected by adoption, kinship and customary care relationships, as well as those at risk of breaking down because of complex needs, and the professionals who support them.

We envision a future in which every family has equitable access to support, resources and community. By breaking down isolation and supporting vulnerable families in need of innovative parenting approaches, we enable family preservation as well as strong and healthy connections.

Today I stand in front of you as the executive director of Adopt4Life, but most importantly as an adoptive mom. I'm carrying the message of my children and thousands of families who have raised their voices since 2018 so that future families formed through adoptions do not have to face the additional burden that a short 35 weeks of parental leave creates and adds to their complex parenting journey.

Today I am here to remind us all to listen to the basic yet fundamental ask of thousands of children and youth who have come to us and asked us to make the legislative change that will ensure that all children and youth awaiting permanency in Canada are given enough time to attach to their new parents and caregivers. For over eight years, Adopt4Life, along with CYPCC and partners across the country, has been advocating a new benefit leave for adoptive parents who are providing permanency to children.

Why is time to attach so critical? Becoming a family overnight is not easy. When you receive the call that you will have your children coming in, there's nothing that prepares you to be fully ready to navigate that complexity of parenting.

As well, the landscape of adoption has changed over the past 20 years. Today, children who are waiting to be adopted are often over the age of 7, and often in their teens and part of sibling groups. In fact, across Canada, we are seeing an overrepresentation of children with coexisting medical and neurodevelopmental challenges within the child welfare system.

Once a child enters child welfare and is later adopted, they have experienced significant breakdowns in attachment and many losses, and often complex trauma. They have endured many moves and many disruptions, significantly impacting their attachment and making it difficult for them to trust the adults in their lives. Can we blame them?

The current 35 weeks of parental leave is just not long enough and therefore adds unnecessary stress to families, thus increasing the risk of breakdown in placement and adoption. This was evident in a formal study led by Western University in partnership with us at Adopt4Life in 2018. The study revealed that during the transition into their new families, over 50% of children were experiencing significant sadness and complex needs and were struggling with mental health.

Meanwhile, 94% of adoptive parents said they would have benefited from 15 weeks of attachment leave and 72% said the current leave did not provide enough time for their children to transition smoothly into their homes. What is more critical is that 21% said the current leave prevented them from adopting a child with complex needs.

Canada must do better for all its children. The additional time of attachment leave will allow children to spend a full year with their new parents, affording them more time to create strong bonds and develop the attachment that they need to begin trusting and integrating into their new family.

I founded Adopt4Life after welcoming a sibling group of three older children. They were eight, 11 and 13. The initial year was not easy for them, or for us as parents. I knew we needed a community to come together so that we could effect the changes needed to ensure that parents and caregivers would be well supported so they could be strong for their children.

I would like to leave you with these thoughts.

If we want a stronger tomorrow for our children, we must do right by them. As my good friend Irwin Elman, a former Ontario child and youth provincial advocate, says, you can't legislate love, but you can legislate the conditions in which love can flourish. Time to attach is essential to creating the right conditions for love to flourish, especially during the first year together, when it is most needed.

I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to all MPs, all ministers and all civil servants who have stood by the Time to Attach campaign and supported the needs of children and youth. Most especially, my gratitude goes to all MPs who have dared to walk the path and share their permanency journey with us. Your stories live with me.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Despaties.

Ms. Morel, you have the floor now for five minutes.

[Anne-Marie Morel, President, Fédération des parents adoptants du Québec]

Thank you for giving the Fédération des parents adoptants du Québec the opportunity to testify about Quebec's experience of adoption leave.

The Fédération is a non-profit organization founded in 1986 which provides services by and for adopting parents to provide them with support, information and guidance on resources, and to defend their interests.

That's the background against which the Fédération demanded and obtained benefit equity between biological parents and adoptive parents under Quebec's parental insurance system.

As you know, Quebec workers who have leave for the birth or adopting a child receive benefits under this system, not under employment insurance. The benefits are more generous as part of the overall family policies in place in the province. However, when the system came into force on January 1, 2006, there was an 18 week difference between the amount of leave for adoptive families and biological families. This inequity naturally affected adoptive workers, and their children, because adopted children were the only ones in Quebec not to be able to have a year of parental presence when they entered the family. It was worse than inequitable; it was discriminatory, as clearly demonstrated by lawyer Éric Poirier and law professors Carmen Lavallée and Daniel Proulx of the Université de Sherbrooke in their article entitled “Le régime québécois d'assurance parentale: un système discriminatoire à l'endroit des enfants adoptés”. It's undeniable that this type of worker protection system has a direct impact on children.

Since January 1, 2021, Quebec has been providing adoptive parents with benefits equivalent to those received by biological parents in terms of length of time and level of income replacement. This measure, which reinstated full equity, has a relatively minor impact on the financial health of the program, because adoptive parents are significantly less numerous than other parents. In 2022 in Quebec, adoptive parents collectively received only 0.5% of the benefits awarded to new parents. The financial stability of the program therefore does not depend heavily on this factor.

Not only is the additional time allowed for adoptive parents to be with their children beneficial to parents and children alike, but also for employers. As reported by many adoptive families that have benefited from the additional weeks available under the recent accommodation and support benefits for adoptions, employees return to work with better mental attitude because they have had the time needed to integrate the child into a daycare setting, which requires considerable resourcefulness for adopted children. They don't appear to feel as guilty as adoptive parents used to, when they were unable to comply with experts' recommendation that they should spend at least a full year with their newly adopted child. They also had more time available to help the child make up for any developmental delays or health setbacks, and to bond as a family.

In fact, spending more time with a child who has had some ups and downs in life and a break from a biological mother and, as is often the case, from many caregivers in adoptive families, it's an investment that gives children a chance to reach their full potential and contribute to society. It can also prevent certain types of harmful behaviour and learning problems stemming from the kinds of psychological harm that can require a working parent to take time off from work.

While the needs of adoptive families are certainly very different, they are no less important. Every extra week spent with an adopted child in the first year after adoption has an impact on their development and their lifelong relations with others.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Morel.

We will begin with Mrs. Falk for six minutes.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I'd like to thank both of the witnesses for being here today and for being willing to contribute to this study in a very thoughtful and meaningful way.

Julie—if it's okay if I call you Julie—I'd like to start with you.

What are some of the risks for the child when parents return to work quickly after the 35 weeks of parental leave?

[Julie Despaties]

As you can imagine, when children join us, they're not little ones. They need a lot of time to know that you're going to be around and you're going to be present. When you have the stress of going back to work, you bring new stress into a house that's already filled with a lot of stress because you're adapting to one another. We haven't benefited from the initial nine months to become accustomed to one another and then the full year of growing and getting the attachment and having the child know they are secure.

As I mentioned earlier, they don't know how they can really trust the adults in their lives. They don't know if you're going to just leave, like many of the foster care families that have left before and have moved around and all of that.

Adding the 15 weeks would truly allow for a child to live a full cycle of one year and therefore to live without the ambiguity of not knowing how that will be. The three months that are missing are so crucial. Truly, they impact these family dynamics as a whole as well.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

What are the risks for the parents of returning to work too quickly?