Minister can set custody arrangements

Full Title:
An Act to Amend the Child and Youth Well-Being Act

Summary#

Bill 21 would amend New Brunswick’s Child and Youth Well-Being Act. It would clearly allow the Minister of Social Development to make agreements with a child’s or youth’s parent to protect the child without returning the child to that parent’s care.

The bill would also apply this change back to January 26, 2024. It would validate certain past agreements and actions by the minister, including agreements about custody or guardianship.

  • The minister could enter into custody or guardianship agreements with a parent while the child remains outside that parent’s care.
  • Agreements made between January 26, 2024, and the bill’s start date could be treated as legally valid under the new rule.
  • Related actions taken by the minister during that period would also be confirmed as valid.
  • Existing agreements that had not ended when the bill started would remain valid and effective.
  • The province and minister would generally be protected from legal proceedings challenging the minister’s authority, if the minister acted in good faith.
  • The bill was introduced at first reading on November 21, 2025. The supplied material does not show that it was passed.

What it means for you#

  • Children and youth: A child or youth could remain outside a parent’s care under an agreement intended to protect their well-being. The bill does not provide details about where the child would live or how each agreement would be monitored.
  • Parents: A parent could enter into a custody or guardianship agreement with the minister without the child being returned to the parent’s care.
  • Families with existing agreements: Certain agreements made since January 26, 2024, could be treated as valid even if the authority for making them was unclear under the previous wording.
  • People involved in past cases: The bill would limit legal challenges based only on whether the minister had authority to make the relevant agreement or take the relevant action, if the minister acted in good faith.
  • Public services: The bill mainly changes the legal authority and protection of the Department of Social Development. The supplied material does not identify a new service or eligibility change for the public.

Expenses#

No fiscal estimate or cost information is provided in the supplied material.

  • The bill could create administrative or legal costs for the Department of Social Development as it applies and reviews these agreements.
  • It could reduce the risk of costs linked to legal challenges about the minister’s authority.
  • No new fee, fine, tax, or direct payment is created.
  • No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

No statements from proponents were supplied. Based on the bill’s text, possible arguments in favour include:

  • The bill could give the minister clearer authority to protect a child without returning the child to a parent’s care.
  • It could provide a formal way to arrange custody or guardianship while keeping the child’s safety as the main concern.
  • Confirming past agreements could prevent uncertainty about arrangements made since January 26, 2024.
  • The changes could make the department’s process more consistent by clearly describing the agreements it may use.
  • Keeping existing agreements valid could avoid disruption for children, youth, and families already covered by them.

Opponents' View#

No statements from opponents were supplied. Possible concerns based on the bill’s text include:

  • The bill applies retroactively, meaning it would treat some past agreements and actions as valid under a legal power added later.
  • It may limit a person’s ability to challenge the minister’s authority in court when the minister acted in good faith.
  • The bill does not clearly describe the safeguards, review process, or rights of parents and children under these agreements.
  • It is unclear how custody and guardianship agreements would interact with court orders or other family-law processes.
  • The bill does not explain how many past agreements are affected or how long the arrangements may continue.
  • The costs of applying, reviewing, or enforcing these agreements are not provided.