2016 QCCQ 9514, 2016 QCCQ 9514

Protection de la jeunesse — 164013 2016 QCCQ 9514 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000658-153 DATE: April 26, 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, presently residing at the Centre de readaptation A at […] in City B district B, […] Adolescents -and- MRS A, domiciled and residing at […] in City C, district A, […] Mother -and- MR B, domiciled and residing […] at City C, district A, […] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT Sec. 95 (1 and 2) and 75 Y.P.A. ______________________________________________________________________ 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 Court is seized of a petition for the review and extension of a decision under

section 95 of the Youth Protection Act concerning X, born on […], 1999, following which the latter was entrusted to a rehabilitation center for a period of four months. [ 2 ] The mother and the adolescent are both present and represented by counsel. The father is absent although he was duly served. The applicant nevertheless spoke to the father the day before the hearing. The father left City C in order to attend a detoxification center in [A Province ]. He didn’t wish to attend court nor postpone the hearing. He consents to the Director’s recommendations as long as his son is happy.

The Court therefore decided that it was in X’s best interest to proceed in the absence of the father. ISSUE TO RESOLVE [ 3 ] At the outset of the hearing, the Director of Youth Protection amended the conclusion sought in regards to the duration of X’s placement.

The Director now requests that the adolescent’s placement in a rehabilitation center be prolonged until the end of July 2016. [ 4 ] The present case does not raise any litigious issue since the parties admit that the security and the development of the adolescent remain endangered and they agree with the recommendations made by the Director. [ 5 ] Everyone agrees that the adolescent’s situation needs clarification, as to know if a return with his mother is possible following his stay at the rehabilitation center.

THE FACTS [ 6 ] The Director of Youth Protection has been offering services to the family for ten years now. Neglect stemming from alcohol and drug abuse by both parents in a context of domestic violence has been at the heart of the Director’s involvement. A careful review of the many judgments rendered is also necessary in order to understand the family situation and as well as the wounds suffered by X. [ 7 ] After being entrusted to his maternal grandmother for many years, X was returned to the care of his mother who had shown many personal improvements.

The director then closed the file and a new report was filed in 2015 which led to many different placements of the adolescent. During the past year alone, X has been entrusted either to an aunt, to his grandmother or ordered to stay in

a rehabilitation center. [ 8 ] On December 10, 2015, Bélanger J. entrusted the adolescent to a rehabilitation center for a period of four months. Considering the lack of change in the mother’s situation, Bélanger J. didn’t see fit to order the reintegration of X with his mother following his stay at the rehabilitation center. [ 9 ] The evidence shows that X's last stay at the rehabilitation center has not shown positive results. Since the last court order, the adolescent has been showing much more opposition and resistance to the re-education program.

The author of the progress report from the rehabilitation center believes there is a link between the adolescent’s growing opposition and his deception following the last court order. [ 10 ] X has trouble expressing his emotions and tends to keep his frustrations bottled up inside. He also shows signs of addiction to cannabis and is awaiting a follow-up with an English speaking counsellor. He is now attending A High School and, up to now, he is generally able to follow rules and attend class. [ 11 ] The mother has recently moved back to City C.

She left an abusive relationship and for the first time in the last year she expresses the wish to be present for her son and to maintain her sobriety. She is awaiting an appointment with a psychologist in order to deal with the stigma of her abusive relationship. She is also willing to seek help from the first line worker in City C. Her determination to free herself for good from her abusive relationship remains to be proven. During the last weeks, she has put her sons first and has shown openness towards the help provided by the applicant. [ 12 ] For years now, the father hasn’t played any

part in his son’s life. His own life still revolves around abusive drug and alcohol consumption. [ 13 ] In support of her recommendations, the applicant believes the Court must take into account the numbers of deceptions and family breakdowns X has suffered over the years. In order to mobilize the adolescent and enhance his self-esteem, the applicant submits that it is essential to provide him a sense of belonging. DECISION [ 14 ] Everyone agrees that X’s emotional stability is paramount. Considering all else has failed the Court is ready to endorse the applicant’s recommendations.

However, as noted during the hearing the challenges that lie ahead remain considerable. [ 15 ] With work and determination, the mother can get her life back on track. To do so she must on the short term remain in City C, seek counselling for her addiction as well as seek psychological support. She must also be ready to offer proper supervision to her son during visits. [ 16 ] For his part, X must invest serious efforts in expressing his emotions and in his personal discipline. He must do his part and further his implication in the re-education program in place at the rehabilitation center.

If not, any attempt to entrust him to his mother is doomed to fail. [ 17 ] While the adolescent is still at the rehabilitation center, it is important that with the help of native resources he be provided with counselling for his drug addiction. Lastly, need the Court remind everyone that the adolescent’s emotional development is at stake.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 18 ] GRANTS the petition; [ 19 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the adolescent are still endangered; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted in a rehabilitation center until July 31, 2016, and followed by progressive return with his mother, if the situation allows it; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the parents and the adolescent be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as to frequency and modalities; [ 22 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and his parents for a period of 12 months; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the adolescent receive services from a psychologist in order to work on his personal issues; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be assessed in regards to his drug consumption and that he receives services, if need be and for as long as deemed necessary by the professional; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the parents report to the D.Y.P. on a regular basis and that they actively participate in the measures designed to put an end to the situation; [ 26 ] ORDERS that both parents benefit from an individual follow-up, notably concerning their substance abuse, for as long as deemed necessary by the professional; [ 27 ] ORDERS both parents not to consume any drugs or alcohol in the adolescent presence and that they remain sober in his presence; [ 28 ] ORDERS the parents to ensure that the adolescent is not in the presence of people under the influence of drugs or alcohol;

[ 29 ] ALLOWS the exchange of information between all professionals implicated in the family’s life regarding the situation in general, the professional-client privilege will remain for the rest; [ 30 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate to the execution of the Court order; [ 31 ] ENTRUSTS the adolescent’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of the present order. __________________________________ NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q. M e Julie Lemire Lemire, Gaouette & Martel Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux Lawyer for the D.Y.P. M e Peggy Corbel Warolin Lawyer for the adolescent M e Daniel Ouellette Legal Aid Lawyer for the mother Date of hearing: April 20, 2016