2021 QCCQ 10145, 2021 QCCQ 10145

Protection de la jeunesse — 214747 2021 QCCQ 10145 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 455-41-001380-211 DATE: May 20, 2021 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PASCALE BERARDINO, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE SITUATION OF: X Born on [...], 2021 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of CIUSSS A Applicant -and- A -and- B Child’s parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT [1] ______________________________________________________________________ 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.).

Introduction [ 1 ] The Director is requesting that Court declares the security and development of the child X in danger on the ground of serious risk of neglect. [ 2 ] As protective measures, the Director recommends that the Court orders that the child be entrusted to a foster family chosen by the Director and to authorize supervised contacts with her parents, by a third party chosen by the Director and upon agreement between the parties; failing agreement, the modalities and frequency will be determined by the Director and that the lifting of the supervision be authorized if the situation allows it. [ 3 ] The Director also recommends that the Court authorize that the child gradually return to her parents’ home or social environment, according to the evolution of the situation and the interest of the child and to entrust the child to her parents should she be returned to the parents’ care, the whole along with other measures and a social follow-up for a period of one year. [ 4 ] At the hearing on May 20, 2021, the mother is present but not represented by a lawyer.

She wishes for the child to return to her home. [ 5 ] The father is present but not represented by a lawyer as well. He also asks for the child to be returned home and request a shorter order. [ 6 ] The child’s lawyer, after hearing the evidence, is generally in agreement with the recommendations of the Director but is also requesting a shorter order in view of the child’s young age. Questions in litigation [ 7 ] When and at what conditions should the child return to her parents’ care?

[ 8 ] What should be the duration of the present order, in order to best answer the child’s needs? Situation of compromission [ 9 ] The Director retained a report in regards to a situation of serious risk of neglect based on a history of unresolved neglect issues amongst both parents. [ 10 ] X is the first child of the couple. [ 11 ] However, the father has two other children from a previous relationship, one of which is adopted and the other, under guardianship. [ 12 ] The mother has an 18 month-old child from a previous relationship who is entrusted to her maternal aunt.

Supervised contacts are authorized once every week. It is observed, during the supervised visits, that the mother needs a lot of support and supervision to meet children’s needs. [ 13 ] In the past, the mother has resided at [Organism A] but she left after the first week. [ 14 ] Her organizational capacity and her knowledge of child development are somewhat lacking. [ 15 ] She suffers from general anxiety disorder and learning difficulties.

She can have cognitive distortions that lead her to misinterpret some situations. [ 16 ] Although she had drug abuse issues in the past, they are now resolved, being sober for more than two years. [ 17 ] She also has a history of being a victim of conjugal violence. [ 18 ] The father is known for substance abuse. The hospital room smelled of cannabis. [ 19 ] His criminal record mainly contains threats of causing harm and carrying a weapon in a careless manner (he carries a knife to protect himself).

He still has a sentence pending and did not accomplish his full hours of community services. [ 20 ] In the past, the father did not collaborate with the Director stating he did not need help to resolve his personal issues. He once got mad at the Director’s office and made a hole in the wall. [ 21 ] At the hospital, the father did not collaborate with the hospital staff who tried to give advice for the child’s bath, sleeping and feedings. He claimed he had children before and knew what to do.

He even threatened the staff while hitting his fist in his hand. [ 22 ] During the pregnancy, the parents refused that the mother be induced, even though there was a risk for the baby’s life as the child presented growth delay.

The father even said he would induce her himself. [ 23 ] All through these situations, the mother is passive and lets the father rant. [ 24 ] In fact, it is observed by the professionals involved that the mother does not make any decisions by herself. [ 25 ] Considering the parents’ history of personal difficulties which are still present and the situation in their other children, the Tribunal finds that the child is at serious risk of neglect.

The measures [ 26 ] When X was discharged from the hospital on March 22, 2021, an immediate protection measure was applied and the child was entrusted to a foster family. [ 27 ] The hospital and the Director required the assistance of police officers when the Director came to get the baby and when the parents were leaving the hospital. [ 28 ] In fact, the father did not want the child to be taken away by the Director’s delegates but did not act aggressively towards them. He only put himself in the doorway and negotiated with the delegate and the police. In the end, he let them take the child.

The parents both left the hospital shortly after. [ 29 ] On March 23 rd , the Court rendered a provisional order, entrusting the child to a foster home, ordering the confidentiality of the resource to the parents and authorizing supervised visits with both parents, despite the request of the Director to forbid contacts with the father. [ 30 ] The father is participating in a follow-up with [Organism B] as a condition of his probation. Mr. C, from that organism states Mr.

B has made much progress. [ 31 ] He states that he has difficulty trusting others due to his own past of neglect and bullying and he rejects social rules. [ 32 ] Mr. C also stated that the father’s discourse about the DYP has changed. He said that he believed he was sincere in his intention to do this right for this baby. [ 33 ] Mr. C also believes that the father does not present a threat to the child and that he estimates as low the risk of conjugal violence.

[ 34 ] Nonetheless, he mentions that the father seems to enter in relationships in which his partner has more difficulties than he does, taking charge of his partner. [ 35 ] The father has resolved his issue regarding his community work and has started to complete 150 hours at the rate of 15 hours per week. [ 36 ] On April 7, 2021, the parents were met at home. They showed that they had everything ready to welcome the baby home. [ 37 ] During the visits, it is observed that the parents are adequate with the child. They are assiduous, punctual and bring the required equipment. [ 38 ] At the beginning, the mother let the father take a leading

part in the care for the child.

When it was related to her, she took her place and the father agreed to step back. [ 39 ] The mother states lacking confidence in herself due to her history of placement and conjugal violence. [ 40 ] During the last weeks, the visits were separate to observe the mother’s parental capacity. [ 41 ] The Director is stating that despite their great personal difficulties, both parents are making the effort to improve their situation. [ 42 ] There is also a great change in the parents’ attitude, particularly the father who is able to contain himself, be adequate with the delegate and the supervisors. [ 43 ] Depending on their involvement in their development, the Director believes that the child could be returned home to them eventually. [ 44 ] The next step will be to observe the parents with the child at the parents’ home. [ 45 ] If the Director is reassured, the supervision could be progressively lifted. [ 46 ] It is clear from the evidence that the child could not be returned right away and that steps have to be taken to ensure the security of this very young and vulnerable child. [ 47 ] An educator will also be provided to ensure that the parents continue to adequately care for the child. [ 48 ] The frequency of the visits is currently twice a week.

The plan is to extend their duration and frequency until a full return home. [ 49 ] The Director is requesting an order of one year to continue to provide with aid, counsel and assistance when the child is returned home. [ 50 ] Since the child is so young, her lawyer says that it would be better to return to court to revise the order in six months to ensure that the orientation is going through as planned. [ 51 ] The Tribunal agrees with the child’s lawyer. [ 52 ] After reviewing the evidence, the Court finds that the recommended measures are in the child’s best interest and answer her needs.

FOR ALL THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: GRANTS partially the present application for protection; DECLARES that the security and the development of the child X are in danger on the ground of serious risk of neglect; ENTRUSTS the child to a foster family chosen by the Director of Youth Protection; AUTHORIZES , in the child’s favour, supervised contacts with her parents by a third party chosen by the Director and upon agreement between the parties; in case of disagreement, the modalities and frequency will be a minimum of twice a week; AUTHORIZES the lifting of the supervision if the situation allows it; AUTHORIZES the child to gradually return to her parents’ home or social environment allowed, according to the evolution of the situation and the interest of the child; ENTRUSTS the child to her parents should she be returned to the parent’s care; ORDERS that the parents take an active and honest part to the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court, to the elaboration of the intervention plan and to the psychosocial follow-up, in order to put an end to the situation of endangerment; ORDERS that the parents periodically report to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regards or in their child’s regard to put an end to the situation of endangerment; TAKES NOTICE of the parents’ commitment to participate with various services inclusively but not limited to the CLSC, an educator, a psychologist, doctors and community organizations such as [Organism C]; ORDERS that a person working for CIUSSS A or any other establishment or body provides aid, counsel and assistance to the child and

her family for a period of six months; ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X to the Director of Youth Protection to see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ PASCALE BERARDINO, J.C.Q. M e Pascale Gauthier Counsel for the DYP M e Maryse Pinsonneault Counsel for the youth Date of hearing: May 20, 2021 Last Exhibits deposed: D-3 Date of written judgment: July 29, 2021