2012 QCCQ 11760, 2012 QCCQ 11760

Protection de la jeunesse — 123227 2012 QCCQ 11760 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000546-127 610-41-000547-125 610-41-000548-123 610-41-000549-121 DATE: June 7, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 2004 Y , born on […], 2007 Z, born on […], 2009 A, born on […], 2010 MRS [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , human relations agent, exercising her profession at the Centre jeunesse A, having a place of business at […] at Town A, district A (Quebec) […] Applicant and Mrs B, domiciled and residing at […] at Town B, district A (Quebec) […]; Mother and Mr C, domiciled and residing at […] at Town B, district A (Quebec) […]; Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ( Sections 38 and 75 , Youth Protection Act, R.S.Q., c.

P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection makes an application to have the security and development of X, born on […], 2004, Y, born on […], 2007, Z, born on […], 2009 and A, born on […], 2010, declared in danger due to parental negligence as defined at sections 38 b) 1°) i), 38 b) 1° iii) and 38 b) 2°) of the Youth Protection Act as well as due to psychological ill-treatment pursuant to

section 38

c) of the same law . [ 2 ] The children are absent but represented by Me Marc Ouimette. The mother is represented by Me Peggy Warolin and the applicant by Me Julie Lemire. [ 3 ] The father is absent. Recently he has been released from jail. On March 23, 2012, all his children's applications have been served to him.

He met the Director of Youth Protection worker Mrs [Social Worker 1] and told her that he agreed with the applicant's recommendations. [ 4 ] After hearing the evidence concerning the reasons why the father is absent, the Court allows the applicant to proceed with the application. [ 5 ] All the parties agree to proceed with a common hearing for all the children. The facts [ 6 ] Due to the young age of the children, their lawyer has no mandate in regards of admissions. The mother's lawyer does admit most of the allegations.

However she does not admit that her client has a drug addiction problem only an alcohol problem. [ 7 ] The Court considers that following the admissions and the testimonies heard there is preponderant evidence of the following facts. [ 8 ] On October 20, 2011, voluntary measures were signed by both parents to ensure the children's protection.

Complaints were made regarding consumption problems by the mother and the father and exposition of family violence by the father. [ 9 ] The parents and social worker have worked together to eliminate the situation of risk for the children without a placement in foster family. However, on March 21, 2012, the event the children went through made it clear that it was no longer safe. On March 26, 2012, this file has been brought to Court.

[ 10 ] Between February and March 21, 2012, the parents had many arguments that led to police involvement. During those arguments the mother had to leave the family home with her children. [ 11 ] By March 21, 2012, the mother was back at the family home. Couple of days after her return, there was already another incident involving police. The parents had been drinking for two days and the father was trying to hit the mother with their vehicle. The father was driving and both parents were intoxicated with all the children in the van.

Upon arrival of the Director of Youth Protection worker, the children were distraught, hungry and diapers were extremely wet. [ 12 ] This incident led to the children being placed with their maternal grandparents. It was acknowledged that this could not be a long term solution for the children as the maternal grandparents struggle with their own addiction to alcohol and drugs. [ 13 ] The two youngest children were placed together in a foster home in Town C and the older two in a foster home in Town D.

The father has been imprisoned since the event took place. [ 14 ] The mother has attempted to go to a treatment center but did not complete the program as she felt too distant from her children and wanted to be home to continue her visits with them. She made it clear that this did not mean that she was not going to get the services needed to abstain from alcohol and drugs. [ 15 ] Therefore the mother sees a drug and alcohol counsellor and a psychologist on a weekly basis.

The mother reports to be drug and alcohol free since March 25, 2012. [ 16 ] On April 16, 2012, the foster family of the two younger children could not continue to keep them for personal reasons. The Director of Youth Protection worker was unable to obtain another foster family in the region and recognized that it would traumatise the children more to have them stay with another family and out of the area. [ 17 ] The Director of Youth Protection made an application to the Court and the youngest two returned with their mother.

The father agreed with that measure. [ 18 ] Until now the mother has continued with these services, obtained a new apartment and the children are safe and secure with her. [ 19 ] Given the evidence and the admissions of both parents concerning the security and the development of their children as being compromised, the Court declares that the security and development of X, born on [...], 2004, Y, born on [...], 2007, Z, born on [...], 2009 and A, born on [...], 2010 are compromised under sections 38 b) 1°) i), 38 b) 1°) iii), 38 b) 2°) and 38

c) of the Youth Protection Act . Applicable measures [ 20 ] The Director of Youth Protection requests that all the children be entrusted to the mother. [ 21 ] The father wants the children back with their mother and hopes that she is also getting the help that she requires to ensure the children's protection. The mother wishes to have her two oldest children back with her. [ 22 ] X is a seven years old boy who is doing well in his family and at school. He associates his parents fighting with alcohol. He is asking to go home and stay home. [ 23 ] Y is a five years old boy who is doing well in his family.

Like his brother X, he was present when their parents were intoxicated and fighting. Like his brother, he has seen a lot for his age. The child still does not fully understand that he will see his father again. He says things like: «I lost my mom and dad». The counselling will help him understand things more clearly. Also the child displays some communication challenges. Like his brother X, he sees the school counsellor at School A. [ 24 ] Z is a two years old girl who functions well within her family. She is a well-kept little girl, always hygienic and dressed appropriately for the weather.

She is quite resilient and has adapted quite well to all changes in her life. According to the applicant A is also doing well. [ 25 ] Since the follow-up with youth protection the family's situation has improved. The parents have collaborated well with the social worker. [ 26 ] The father and the mother are not together anymore. However, their relationship remains unclear. [ 27 ] The father remains sober since the last incident. He wishes to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection worker. [ 28 ] The mother remains sober. Her two youngest children live with her and she is doing well.

She sees a psychologist and an alcohol and drug worker. She attends AA meetings and seems serious and committed to abstaining from drugs and alcohol. She collaborates well with the Director of Youth Protection worker. [ 29 ] According to the Director of Youth Protection worker, there is a clear bond between the parents and the children. Their parenting is adequate and their discipline approach is acceptable. They tend to their children's needs.

The mother mainly provides childcare; however the father has been active since the birth of the two younger children. [ 30 ] Given the evidence the Court considers that the applicant's recommendations are likely to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the children are in danger. [ 31 ] The two youngest children live with their mother and she tends to their needs. She remains sober and has taken the necessary steps to abstain from consuming alcohol and drugs. It is important that she continues her follow-up with a psychologist and with her

counsellor for addiction support. [ 32 ] The father is hopeful that all the children will return with their mother and that he will have access to them. It is important that he maintains his sobriety about drugs and alcohol. He has discussed with the Director of Youth Protection worker about a possibility to have a fallow-up for anger management. The Court is convinced that such a follow-up could help him. [ 33 ] Even if their relationship is over, the fact remains that they are still the parents of four children and they will stay in contacts for many years to come.

The decision they made to stop using drugs and alcohol is certainly in the best interest of their children but is difficult to maintain. The parents will need support and guidance from the Director of Youth Protection to maintain their sobriety and to prevent the reoccurrence of child neglect, domestic violence and alcohol and drugs abuse.

For these reasons, the court: [ 34 ] Entrusts the child X, born on […], 2004, to the care of his mother; [ 35 ] Entrusts the child Y, born on […], 2007, to the care of his mother; [ 36 ] Entrusts the child Z, born on […], 2009, to the care of his mother; [ 37 ] Entrusts the child A, born on […], 2010, to the care of his mother; [ 38 ] Orders that the contacts with the father and his four children be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as per frequency, length and modalities; [ 39 ] Orders the parents to abstain from using drugs and alcohol; [ 40 ] Orders the parents to maintain a safe home for their children; [ 41 ] Recommends that the father receive individual counselling for anger management; [ 42 ] Recommends that the mother pursues her treatment regarding her alcoholism by meeting with a representative of [Program A]; [ 43 ] Recommends that the mother continues her follow-up with a psychologist; [ 44 ] Orders the parents to cooperate with the Director of Youth Protection and meet with his worker upon request to inform him of the current situation; [ 45 ] Orders that a person working for an establishment or organisation provides aid, council and assistance to X, Y, Z, A and their parents for a period of one year; [ 46 ] Orders any police body to collaborate for the purpose of executing this enactment; [ 47 ] Entrusts the children's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing the measures ordered by the Court; [ 48 ] Orders that all the measures be in force for a period of one year. __________________________________ Josée Bélanger, J.C.Q.

Me Julie Lemire, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Marc Ouimette, attorney for the children Me Peggy Warolin, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: May 11, 2012