2022 QCCQ 9004, 2022 QCCQ 9004

Protection de la jeunesse — 224849 2022 QCCQ 9004 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] “Youth Division” No: 635-41- 001162-210 DATE: January 19, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE FRANÇOIS STE-MARIE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION and X Born on [...], 2021 child and A B parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT

Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act (R.S.Q. c. P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ Warning : The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcast of information allowing a child or the child’s parents to be identified. Every person who contravenes this provision is liable to a fine (sections 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] In accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act , the Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for the decision rendered from the bench at the hearing held on January 18, 2022. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection (the Director) alleges that the child’s security or development is endangered due to a situation of serious risk of neglect. [ 3 ] Today, the Director recommends that the child be entrusted to his mother’s care, at the exclusion of the father and that support measures be ordered until January 31, 2023. [ 4 ] The parents are contesting the Director’s orientation.

They propose that the child be entrusted to them and that they be permitted to reunite as a family. They both agree with the proposed support measures. [ 5 ] Following the hearing, the child’s attorney agreed with the Director’s plan but proposed that the measures be put in place for a period of six months instead of one year. Questions in litigation [ 6 ] Is it possible to maintain the child in the care of his two parents? [ 7 ] Are the proposed measures in the child’s best interest and are they respecting his rights? [ 8 ] What should be the duration of the Court order?

Context and analysis [ 9 ] As the child in a young infant, it is “normal” to review the family’s history in order to determine if a situation of serious risk of neglect exists. [ 10 ] The situation of the child’s sibling has been followed by the Director. The child’s sibling has been placed in a foster family.

[ 11 ] The father struggles with alcohol consumption issues. He only recently took steps to address this situation. [ 12 ] On September 9, 2021, the mother had to call the police as the father was intoxicated by alcohol in their apartment. The father was arrested for mischief. [ 13 ] On September 17, 2021, again, the mother had to call the police due to the father’s behaviours. He was intoxicated by alcohol and was disturbing her. [ 14 ] On October 7, 2021, during a police intervention, they found the father covered with blood. At the time, he was heavily intoxicated by alcohol.

The father did not know what happened to him to be hurt this way. He was eventually brought to the nursing centre. [ 15 ] On November 1, 2021, the police had to intervene as the father was driving a vehicle in the community while intoxicated by alcohol. Doing this, the father failed to comply with a criminal condition not to consume alcohol. [ 16 ] It is clear for the Tribunal that the Director proved by preponderance that the father struggled with alcohol consumption issues. [ 17 ] On November 15, 2021, the police assisted the social worker, [social worker 1], during a visit at the family home.

The Youth Protection worker had to intervene in order to retrieve the child’s brother, Y, and bring him back to his foster family. [ 18 ] On November 16, 2021, it was convened between the Director and the parents that the mother and the child would go to Ms. C, the paternal aunt. Later that evening, the worker found the father intoxicated by alcohol, at his sister’s place. During the Director’s intervention, the father then became aggressive towards the worker. He yelled and ran after the Youth Protection worker. Immediate protective measures were invoked.

During the hearing, the father mentioned not remembering this incident. It was also mentioned that during the incident, the child was in another room and did not witness the incident. The Tribunal is certain that the child heard the father yelling and making trouble. This is unacceptable … [ 19 ] When he is sober, the father appears to have good parenting skills.

When he is intoxicated by alcohol, he is impulsive, unpredictable and can become aggressive. [ 20 ] On November 22, 22021, the Youth Protection worker was informed that the father had sought support from Social Services regarding alcohol consumption and anger management. He has been put on a waiting list to attend the [Centre A]. [ 21 ] On November 25, 2021, the Tribunal entrusted the child to the mother’s care at the exclusion of the father, on a provisional basis. [ 22 ] Since, both parents are reporting that they follow the established rules.

They live in different houses and someone is always there to supervise when the father comes to visit the mother and the child. [ 23 ] The Director reports that on two situation, the conditions were not respected and the parents were together with the child, unsupervised. These concerns are not based on facts that were observed and presented as evidence. [ 24 ] The mother has been collaborating with the Youth Protection worker but she still needs support to prioritize the child’s protection. The Director’s perception is that the mother is not protective of her child.

This perception is not supported by the evidence. The mother believes that she is able to protect the child from the father’s alcohol consumption. The Tribunal agrees with her. [ 25 ] The Director’s concerns regarding the history of conjugal violence between the parents was not supported by the evidence presented in the child’s file. The Tribunal’s judgement has to be based on the evidence. [ 26 ] As a young infant, the child is completely vulnerable and dependant on caregivers. He needs to remain in an environment that is free of alcohol consumption and violence.

The Tribunal believes that the parents will take the necessary steps to ensure that this happens. THEREFORE AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 27 ] GRANTS the application for protection; [ 28 ] DECLARES that the security or the development of the child is endangered (

section 38 b) 2 of the Youth Protection Act ); [ 29 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to the parents’ care; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the child is never left alone with the father; [ 31 ] ORDERS that the parents report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in their child’s regard to put an end to the situation of compromission; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the parents report in person at regular intervals to the Director of Youth Protection to inform him of the current situation; [ 33 ] ORDERS that the father remain sober and without any violent behavior at all times in the presence of the child; [ 34 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the child is not exposed to violence or alcohol consumption; [ 35 ] RECOMMENDS that the father seek formal help through the Social services or a treatment Center concerning his personal

issues; [ 36 ] AUTHORIZES the Director to perform unannounced visits at the family’s house; [ 37 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and his family; [ 38 ] THE WHOLE until January 19, 2023; [ 39 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. ___________________________________ François Ste-Marie, J.C.Q.

Written and signed on January 27, 2022 /cd Mtre Geneviève Apollon Counsel for the Director of Youth Protection Mtre Nada Boumeftah Counsel for the child Mtre Ève Laoun Counsel for the mother Mtre Jean-Bernard Terrisse Counsel for the father Date of hearing: January 19, 2022