Law360 Canada (May 13, 2026, 2:39 PM EDT) --

Andrea Clarke

Practising in rural Ontario and the North gives me a perspective on the access-to-justice crisis we are currently facing. Many vulnerable people face child protection proceedings while also dealing with addiction, poverty, mental health challenges and isolation. These are real, human stories, families at risk of being separated, children caught in uncertainty and communities trying to help with fewer resources.

Challenges with access to justice in child protection cases are not new, but they are becoming more acute. In many rural and northern areas, there are not enough lawyers who can take Legal Aid cases. This often leaves parents to represent themselves in complicated and stressful legal situations.

Child protection cases are one of the most intrusive ways the state can intervene. Parents are expected to understand laws, court rules and evidence requirements, often while in crisis. They must also show child protection workers that they have dealt with issues like housing, addiction or poverty, usually with little support.

This does not mean children should ever be returned to unsafe situations. Child safety always comes first, but we also need to ask: are we giving parents enough support before and during these cases to make reunification possible? Too often, the answer is no.

We should not see this as parents versus child protection agencies, or lawyers versus frontline workers. Most people involved are doing their best in a system with too little funding, heavy caseloads and few resources. Still, we need to recognize these limits if we want real change.

For lawyers who practise in these areas, the weight of the work is profound. The files themselves are not merely voluminous; they are emotionally consuming. Medical records, police disclosure, addiction histories and allegations of trauma reveal deeply painful realities that lawyers carry long after court appearances conclude. In smaller communities, practitioners are not detached from the individuals they represent. They become part of the community itself. They see the barriers their clients face outside of courtrooms, and they understand that many “failures” later criticized in proceedings are often rooted in geography, poverty and isolation rather than indifference.

A missed supervised visit can later become evidence of inconsistency or lack of commitment. Yet in many rural communities, supervised access centres are located at significant distances away, making it nearly impossible for a parent without a vehicle, limited public transportation or unstable income to attend access visits. Similarly, expectations for regular phone contact between parent and child may fail to account for areas with poor cellular coverage or inconsistent internet access.

These realities matter. They must be understood contextually rather than interpreted solely through a lens of compliance and non-compliance.

There is also an urgent need for greater cultural competency within child protection proceedings. Representation cannot be effective if lawyers and decision-makers fail to understand the lived realities of the communities they serve. Cultural understanding is not a superficial exercise; it is essential to competent advocacy.

That understanding may mean visiting a farming community to appreciate the realities of agricultural life when representing farming families. It may mean recognizing multigenerational living arrangements, informal caregiving systems or the role of extended kinship networks within Indigenous and culturally diverse communities. It also means recognizing that poverty should never be automatically conflated with parental unfitness.

Seeing clients within environments where they feel safe and comfortable often provides a more accurate understanding of their circumstances than sterile courtrooms or office meetings ever could, particularly in child protection matters. Understanding living conditions, community supports and family dynamics is essential when developing meaningful care plans that prioritize both child safety and family preservation.

These concerns become even more significant in Indigenous communities and among culturally diverse families. Courts and legal professionals must move beyond generalized notions of neutrality and begin recognizing how cultural identity, heritage and community connections directly impact children’s best interests.

The legal system must continue evolving toward substantive equity rather than mere formal equality. Treating every family identically does not account for the vastly different barriers faced by those living in remote, impoverished or culturally marginalized communities.

What is needed moving forward is not criticism directed at any single institution, but rather collective recognition that access to justice cannot exist meaningfully without accessible representation, culturally informed advocacy and practical community support. Rural and northern communities require sustained investment in family law and child protection services, increased Legal Aid funding, expanded supervised access resources and stronger infrastructure to support parents attempting reunification.

Most importantly, the justice system must continue to remember that behind every file number is a family. Many of these parents are trying — imperfectly, inconsistently and sometimes unsuccessfully — but trying nonetheless. Effective representation means understanding not only the legal issues before the court, but also the realities shaping the lives of the people involved. Until those realities are fully acknowledged, access to justice in rural and northern child protection proceedings will remain more aspirational than actual.

Andrea Clarke is a lawyer practising in criminal, family and child protection law across Ontario and Nunavut. She holds both an LLB and an MBA from the University of Birmingham. Andrea currently serves as a deputy judge and is a panel member with the Office of the Children’s Lawyer. Based in Kincardine with her husband and three children, she is committed to advancing access to justice for individuals and families in rural and northern communities.

The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Yvette Trancoso at Yvette.Trancoso-barrett@lexisnexis.ca or call 905-415-5811.