2019 QCCQ 16105, 2019 QCCQ 16105

Protection de la jeunesse — 196418 2019 QCCQ 16105 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] Youth Division No: 760-41-005917-193 DATE: May 14, 2019 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X Born: […], 2013 Child ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION a Applicant v.

A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] Alleging that psychological ill-treatment and a serious risk of neglect endanger the security and the development of the child X, the Director of Youth Protection seeks the application of various protective measures for six months. [ 2 ] The parents as well as the child’s attorney, acting under a legal mandate, subscribe to the evaluation and orientation sought by the Director. [ 3 ] Analysis and decision [ 4 ] The Director of Youth Protection retains a situation endangering the child as of October 2018.

X resides with her mother and sees her father on a sporadic basis, although he is not at that time recognized on her birth certificate.

The parents have another older child who resides with his father on a full-time basis. [ 5 ] On December 11, 2018, the mother signs an agreement for the application of voluntary measures for nine months in which X remains in her care. [ 6 ] As to the situation of endangerment, the mother recognizes the following: • Her daughter is exposed to a persistent parental conflict; • Since her youth, the mother struggles with substance abuse issues; • The mother’s parental capacities are regularly overwhelmed by her lifestyle, notably her alcohol abuse; [ 7 ] Initially, the mother collaborates in the follow-up and is well-intentioned as to her desire to not subject her daughter to her drinking nor the conflicts with her father.

She undertakes a therapy in regards to her dependency issues, but ceases her implication after a few weeks. [ 8 ] Repeatedly, incidents occur putting into question the mother’s ability to supervise her daughter. She is seen to be intoxicated and conflicts occur in the home. On one occasion, X asks for her father to come and get her in reason of her mother’s erratic behaviours. X verbalizes being struck by her mother during an argument. [ 9 ] X spends increasing amounts of time at her father’s, while her mother tries to manage her substance abuse.

Although somewhat sheltered from her mother’s issues and the parental conflict, she still suffers the impacts of such. [ 10 ] A Superior Court judgment recognizes the father’s paternity as of February 14, 2019. He also cooperates in the follow-up but

can lack transparency as to his active role in the parental conflict. [ 11 ] As the family situation continues to be problematic and even degenerates, despite the Director’s implication, the Director decides to petition the Court. On February 28, 2019, the Court entrusts the child to her father on a provisional basis while structuring her contacts with her mother. [ 12 ] This becomes an impetus for the mother. She fully cooperates with the interven-tion and re-engages a therapy in regards to addiction. She maintains her sobriety.

There is a consequent positive evolution of the family dynamic as the parents are able to maintain a more civil and collaborative relationship. They commit to co-parent. [ 13 ] Seeing the mother’s stability, the parties agree to progressively extend the frequency and modalities of her access to X. Such proceeds positively and, as of May, the parents agree to share custody of their daughter on an alternating week basis. [ 14 ] The Court endorses the Director’s evaluation and proposed orientation, such being an accurate reflection of the child’s best interests and the objectives of the law.

Although there is a positive evolution of the child’s family dynamic, such is still precarious in reason of the long-standing difficulties. [ 15 ] FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS the application; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child are in danger in reason of: • serious risk of neglect (article 38b)2) Youth Protection Act ); • psychological ill-treatment (article 38c) Youth Protection Act ); [ 18 ] ENTRUSTS the child to her parents; [ 19 ] TAKES ACT that the child will reside with her parents on a share custody basis on alternating weeks; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the mother be sober at all times in the presence of her child; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 22 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and her family; [ 23 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother continues her follow-up with her addiction worker; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the parents refrain from exposing their child to the conflict between them; [ 25 ] ALL THESE MEASURES for 6 months; __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Sarah Gaudry Staub Attorney for the Applicant Me Stéphane L’Écuyer Attorney for the father Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the children Date of hearing: May 14, 2019