2012 QCCQ 13682, 2012 QCCQ 13682

Protection de la jeunesse — 125838 2012 QCCQ 13682 COURT OF QUEBEC Canada PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF […] Youth Court Division No: 760-41-004197-128 DATE: August 20, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE BEATRICE CLEMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X Born : [...], 1996 Adolescent DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION OF LE CENTRE JEUNESSE A Petitioner -and- A -and- B JC0B11 Parents of the adolescent ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT

______________________________________________________________________ CAUTION : The Youth Protection Act provides that within the framework of this Act, no person may publish or broadcast information allowing a child or the child's parents to be identified. Whomsoever contravenes this

article is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine (articles 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A .) [ 1 ] The Court is seized of a motion for protection concerning the adolescent, X. The Director of Youth Protection alleges that the security or development of the adolescent are in danger in reason of a situation of serious behavioral difficulties, negligence as to supervision and physical abuse, as is more amply detailed in paragraph 3 of the motion. [ 2 ] The Director recommends that the adolescent be maintained in her maternal environment with measures of aid and support for 9 months.

As evidence, the Director produces various reports on the adolescent's social situation as well as other documents, in lieu of testimony. [ 3 ] The Court proceeds in the absence of the father, duly served of the proceedings. The parties present offer their position as to the motion for the Court record and affirm their agreement as to the measures sought. [ 4 ] At the onset of the evaluation, the adolescent resides with her mother and sister, Y, in the rural community of city A.

The father has irregular access to the children and is minimally involved in their lives. [ 5 ] The last few years are increasingly challenging for the family. The mother lacks the tools necessary to counter her daughters oppositional behaviors, who, concurrently refuse to respond to the implementation of structure and rules, as these have not been applied with consistency or coherence in the past. [ 6 ] In the home, communication is deficient and there is a high level of volatility and tension. Fights are recurrent and, in the absence of a means of diffusion, rapidly escalate in intensity and loss of control.

The police intervene on numerous occasions in the last year. The mother and her daughters are overwhelmed and frustrated with their family situation. [ 7 ] The mother tends to blame the family issues on Y, who, in turn, feels rejected and responds with aggression and opposition. The sibling relationship is also problematic, vacillating between rivalry and complicity, oftentimes with delinquent and oppositional overtones.

The mother recognizes losing control over her anger. [ 8 ] The mother regularly leaves her daughters alone in the home for extended periods of time (few days), accentuating the sibling difficulties and delinquent activities. [ 9 ] The Director of Youth Protection intervenes after a violent conflict in the family. On February 7, 2012, an argument between the mother and her two adolescents degenerates to physical confrontation, following which the mother calls for a police intervention. The mother recognizes having pushed X and having thrown a glass. [ 10 ] The mother expulses her daughters from the home.

On a provisional basis, X is sent to reside with her grand-mother, while Y is entrusted to a reception center. [ 11 ] In March, X returns home after the parties agree to respect house rules, which are determined in conjunction with the case worker. Y remains in a reception center setting until the end of the year. [ 12 ] X's situation stabilizes and her behaviors gradually improve at home and at school. The mother is more consistent as to the application of rules and this, although the adolescent often balks at the strict nature of the rules she has bound herself to respect.

Although the situation remains precarious, mother and daughter are able to adequately address the various issues of contention. The intervention of the Director remains pertinent to guide and support them in their efforts. [ 13 ] Furthermore, the Court considers the additional challenges, which may arise in the event that Y returns home at the end of the year.

It is necessary that the Director remain present in order to help the family in this transition and avoid any regression to the former dysfunctional relationships and behaviors. [ 14 ] In view of the admissions and the reports submitted in evidence, the Court is satisfied of the evidence and consequently determines that the security and the development of the adolescent are compromised for the reasons detailed by the Director.

The measures recommended are also appropriate and reflect her best interests. [ 15 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the adolescent are in danger; [ 18 ] MAINTAINS the adolescent in her maternal milieu; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and her parents undertake an active

part in the application of the measures designed to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the adolescent is in danger; [ 20 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the adolescent and her parents for a period of 9 months;

[ 21 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre Jeunesse A for the execution of the measures. __________________________________ BEATRICE CLEMENT, J.C.Q. Me Caterine Caron Attorney for the Petitioner Me Michel Robert Attorney for the mother Me Maryse Fournier Attorney for the child Date of hearing: August 20, 2012