- Download the Part X guide
- Terms used in this guide
- Does Part X of the CYFSA apply to you?
- Collection, use, and disclosure of personal information
Consent and capacity
- Elements of consent
- Consent may be implied in some cases
- Consent may be written or verbal
- Presumption of consent’s validity
- Conditional consent and withdrawal of consent
- Capacity to consent
- Substitute decision-makers
- Safeguarding and managing personal information
Access to records of personal information
- Individual’s right of access
- Access exceptions
- Is the record dedicated primarily to the provision of service to the individual?
- How are access requests made?
- Service provider’s response to access requests
- Substitute decision-makers can request access
- Correction of records
- Offences and immunity
- The role of the Information and Privacy Commissioner
Substitute decision-makers can request access
A substitute decision-maker can request access to an individual’s record on their behalf.112 For example, the custodial parent of a child under 16-years-old who is receiving services from your organization may request access to the child’s records. In these cases, the custodial parent would “stand in the shoes of” the child to make the request. This would be an access request (sections 312-314 of the CYFSA), rather than a disclosure. Any reference to the individual in Part X would be read as a reference to the substitute decision-maker. For example, the requirement to respond to the individual within 30 days would be read as a requirement to respond to the substitute decision-maker within that timeframe.
You can rely on a person’s assertion that they have authority to request access as a substitute decision-maker unless it is unreasonable to do so.113 Note that it is an offence under the CYFSA to make an access or correction request under false pretences.114
When a substitute decision-maker requests access on behalf of a capable child, the decision of the capable child prevails if there is a conflict.115 For example, a custodial parent requests access to her 14-year-old daughter’s records, but the daughter indicates that she does not want her mother to have access. Provided the youth is capable, her decision prevails, and the mother’s access request will be refused.