2016 QCCQ 9457, 2016 QCCQ 9457

Protection de la jeunesse — 164005 2016 QCCQ 9457 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000241-042 DATE: February 4, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ MRS [SOCIAL WORKER 1], exercising her profession at the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A, having a place of business at […] in City A, district A, […] Applicant -and- X, residing at […] in City B, district B, […] Adolescent -and- MRS A, domiciled and residing at […] in City A, district A, […] Mother -and- MR B, domiciled and residing at […] in City C, district A, […] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Sec. 95 (1 and 2) and 75 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act forbids the publishing or broadcasting of information allowing for a child or the child’s parents to be identified.

Any person who contravenes this provision commits an offence and is liable to a fine (sections 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection makes an application for the review and the extension of a decision rendered by Bigué J. on September 25, 2015, concerning X, born on July 16, 2003, by which the adolescent was entrusted to a rehabilitation center for a period of four months. More specifically, the Director seeks the extension of the adolescent’s placement in a rehabilitation center until July 8, 2016. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the parents are both absent, although they were notified.

The applicant spoke to the father on the morning of the hearing to learn that he was in [A Province] and did not intend to attend court. He however informed the applicant of his consent to the Director’s recommendations. ISSUE TO RESOLVE [ 3 ] The present case does not raise any litigious issue since the adolescent admits that his security and development remain endangered. In addition, he consents to remain in a rehabilitation center until July . FACTS AND DECISON [ 4 ] Last fall the long term placement of the adolescent in his foster family broke down after his display of behavioral disturbance.

Moreover, the foster mother is still grieving the loss of her husband. The growing behavior problems of the adolescent prompted Justice Bigué’s decision to entrust X to a rehabilitation center. [ 5 ] The evidence reveals that X still needs the services provided by the rehabilitation center. Despite the last few months at the rehabilitation center, the adolescent continues to show resistance towards the re-education program and opposition to authority. He tends to be deceitful and has difficulty getting along with his peers.

During an outing at a hockey game, X became disruptive and agitated after being denied permission to do something. He is presently in a special group with one on one counselling. [ 6 ] The evidence reveals that X is a gifted student, but his boredom in class can lead to disruptive behavior.

[ 7 ] The mother still struggles with her addictions. The father has recently been released from jail. In fact, he spent most of his life in and out of jail because of his drinking problem and his inability to manage his aggressiveness. His has fewer contacts with X as they maintain a distant relationship. [ 8 ] The evidence convinces the Court that the security and development of the adolescent remain endangered.

In addition to the initial findings, the evidence shows that the security and development of X are also endangered due to serious behavioral disturbance. [ 9 ] The proposed measures are necessary as the adolescent still needs a structured environment. The Court encourages X to further his implication in the re−education program in place at the rehabilitation center. Moreover, he has everything it takes to succeed academically.

He must learn to respect basic rules in the hope he will adhere to social conventions. [ 10 ] The applicant must also support the adolescent and try to motivate him in some way, notably by targeting a foster family who would eventually be ready to welcome X in their home.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 11 ] GRANTS the petition; [ 12 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the adolescent remain in danger; [ 13 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to a rehabilitation center until July 6, 2016; [ 14 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counsel and assistance to parents and the adolescent until the latter reaches the age of majority; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the parents and X be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as to the frequency, the modalities, the length and in the presence of a third party, if deemed necessary by the DYP; [ 16 ] ORDERS both parents not to consume any drugs or alcohol in the presence of their child; [ 17 ] ORDERS both parents to ensure that their child is not in the presence of people under the influence of drugs or alcohol, during visits with them; [ 18 ] ORDERS the parents to report periodically to the Director on the measures they apply in their own regard or in the adolescent’s regard, to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the adolescent are in danger; [ 19 ] AUTHORIZES the adolescent to have visits in a foster family during his stay at the rehabilitation center, provided his situation allows it; [ 20 ] ORDERS the police force to collaborate to the execution of the present order; [ 21 ] ENTRUSTS the adolescent's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of the present judgment. __________________________________ NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q.

M e Julie Lemire Lemire, Gaouette & Martel Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux Lawyer for the DYP M e Peggy Warolin Lawyer for the adolescent Date of hearing: January 21, 2016