2013 QCCQ 10542, 2013 QCCQ 10542

Protection de la jeunesse — 133287 2013 QCCQ 10542 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001332-102 640-41-001330-106 DATE: July 30, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A C.Y.P.C., working in Town A Applicant -and- X and Y, residing and domiciled in Town A, district A, Québec Children -and- A, residing and domiciled Town A, district A, Québec Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The applicant refers the situation of X and Y to the Court in order to review the last decision rendered on May 4, 2012 by the Honourable Lise Gagnon, J.C.Q. [ 2 ] At this date, the judge maintained that the security and development of these children were still endangered, as declared on January 12, 2011, and ordered their placement for a period of six months. [ 3 ] Since the children are entrusted to members of their extended family for more than two years, the applicant now recommends extending their placement to work on a life plan for them. [ 4 ] The children and the mother are present and represented at the hearing.

The great-grandmother, who fosters X, is also present. She requests to be declared party of the hearing. Considering the applicant’s recommendation, being to entrust X to another foster home, the Court considers that Mrs B should have the opportunity to express herself on this matter. Therefore, she is declared party of the hearing according to

Section 81 of the Youth Protection Act. [ 5 ] Initially, the applicant was recommending that the children be entrusted until they reach their majority considering the incapacity of their mother to address her personal issues. Moreover, their father is deceased. [ 6 ] Therefore, January 8, 2013, the applicant asked the Court to entrust Y to the foster family he was living with, and X to a new foster family.

Even though the applicant recognises that X evolves well with her great-grandmother and develop a good bound, the fact that Mrs B is an elder with some serious physical handicap due to her health issues should be considered. [ 7 ] For these reasons, she cannot recommend for X a life plan with Mrs B. [ 8 ] The hearing had to be continued to another date because of shortage of time. On March 12, 2013, the case had to be postponed to June 4, 2013, owing to the absence of the applicant. In the meantime, statu quo remained. [ 9 ] On June 4, 2013, new facts induce the parties to review their position.

They now agree on the motives that endangered the security and development of the children and on the measures to implement. [ 10 ] Based on the admissions, the testimonies and the report prepared by the applicant, the Court notes the following essential elements. [ 11 ] X and Y are the children of Mrs A and Mr C who is, as mentioned before, unfortunately deceased.

[ 12 ] DYP is involved in this family because of certain behaviours of the mother who failed to resolve her drinking problem, and this, since many years. [ 13 ] Besides, even recently, after having giving birth to her last child, she put herself in a situation where the police and the DYP had to intervene. She was again highly intoxicated by alcohol. [ 14 ] Parties admit that this addiction affects the mother’s capacity to provide the care, maintenance and education and to ensure the supervision of her children.

Consequently, their situation remained in danger. [ 15 ] Nevertheless, the mother has recently made some concrete steps to join a therapy center, on a long-term base, in order to address the dependence she deals with. In the situation of Y [ 16 ] As said previously, the recommendation for Y was to entrust him until majority to the foster family he was living with at the time of the petition. However, this family has declared since not being able to continue to take care of him.

Consequently, the director has to find a stable family who will accept to take him in charge until he reaches his majority. [ 17 ] If, in the meantime, the mother succeeds in settling her drinking problem, there will be an occasion to evaluate if another option is conceivable. In the situation of X [ 18 ] Initially, the recommendation was to entrust her to a foster family, project with which she was agreeing.

However, parties today change their mind and ask the Court to entrust the youth to her great-grandmother. [ 19 ] Because of this new position, the Court particularly insists for the youth’s attorney to make sure that this is the youth’s wish and that she is not subjected to any kind of pressure. Apparently, this is her choice made in a full and enlightened manner. [ 20 ] Even so, the Court has the occasion to hear the great-grandmother and the applicant about the opportunity to maintain the youth in her actual environment.

It turns out that the only obstacle is that it is difficult to consider a long-term placement with a 79-year-old person. [ 21 ] Besides, from Mrs [Social Worker 1]’s point of view, this environment is appropriate. At many times in the past, DYP had recourse to Mrs B to take care of children when crisis occurred.

In a general manner, the evidence seems to suggest that Mrs B is capable to control her environment, which is safe. [ 22 ] Other persons, adults and children, are present in her house, in a permanent or sporadic way, and they all contribute to create a family life. [ 23 ] Therefore, in all likelihood, this place is adequate and safe, and there is no reason to fear for the youth’s development and safety.

Moreover, the parties suggest that the prospective foster family, Mrs D, could receive the youth if the great-grandmother needs some respite. [ 24 ] The Court regrets that a life plan cannot be put in place faster for Y, and wish that it will be possible very soon to do so, if no other option is possible, in order to provide security and stability to him. [ 25 ] Concerning X, even though the law holds that a placement until majority should be considered at this point, it is in her best interest to be maintained in the environment in which she evolves since two years, and this, for another year. [ 26 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 27 ] GRANTS the motions; [ 28 ] REVISES the decision rendered by the Honourable Lise Gagnon, J.C.Q. on May 23, 2012; [ 29 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X, born on […], 2000, and Y, born on […], 2006, are still endangered; [ 30 ] ORDERS that Y be entrusted to a foster family for a period of 12 months; [ 31 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted to her great-grandmother, Mrs B, for a period of 12 months, with the possibility to offer some respite in the family of Mrs D, if needed in any way; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the children and their mother be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection in terms of conditions and frequency; [ 33 ] ORDERS that the mother remain sober in the presence of her children; [ 34 ] ORDERS that the director encourage the contacts between the siblings; [ 35 ] AUTHORIZES the director to sign any medical, school or travel request if the mother is not available; [ 36 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel or assistance be provided to the children and to their mother for a period of 12 months;

[ 37 ] ENTRUSTS the children's situation to the Director of Youth Protection who shall then see that the measure is carried out. [ 38 ] ORDERS any peace officer to collaborate in the execution of this enactment. __________________________________ JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS, J.C.Q. M e Robert-André Adam Counsel for the applicant M e Cassandra Neptune Counsel for the children M e Sarah Plamondon Counsel for the mother Date of hearing: January 8, 2013 June 4, 2013