2015 QCCQ 19529, 2015 QCCQ 19529

Protection de la jeunesse — 154740 2015 QCCQ 19529 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-0 29474-152 Date: June 29, 2015 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on […], 2015 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of Youth and Family Centres A Applicant -and- A , the mother -and- B , the father The parents JUDGMENT

Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act (L.R.Q., c. P-34.1 ) 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.). [ 1 ] JD2620 The Court hereby confirms and provides written reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of June 29, 2015, in accordance with the provisions of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act [1] . [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection of Youth and Family Centres A filed a motion to declare that the security and development of a child is in danger in the case of X , a five month-old child, based on the serious risk of neglect to which she is exposed. [ 3 ] The facts alleged in support of the motion dated March 12, 2015 are as follows: 3.1. the mother suffers from an eating disorder and is followed by the Douglas Hospital; 3.2. the mother also suffers from anxiety and is followed by her general practitioner; 3.3. the mother found out that she was pregnant at the seventh month of her pregnancy; 3.4. during her pregnancy, the mother was drinking up to twenty (20) beers per week and was consuming marijuana on an occasional basis; 3.5. the mother reports that, when she found out that she was pregnant, she stopped consuming drugs and alcohol; 3.6. during her last months of pregnancy, the mother made plans for the child to be adopted; 3.7. on January 28 th , 2015, the mother signed a general consent for the child to be adopted; 3.8. on the same date, the child left the hospital with the adoptive family; 3.9. on February 12 th , 2015, the mother changed her mind and revoked the consent for adoption; 3.10. on February 12 th , 2015, the mother signed a provisional agreement for the child to remain placed in a foster family during the evaluation of the signalement;

3.11. on the same date, the child moved from the adoptive family to a foster family; 3.12. the mother is experiencing financial difficulties; she works part-time and resides with a roommate; 3.13. the mother has little support in the community and has a longstanding history of difficulties with her own parents; 3.14. the child’s grandfather reports that the mother has difficulty taking care of herself; 3.15. the mother’s therapist from the Douglas Hospital reports that the mother made some gains but that she presents as immature; 3.16. the mother has not put in place services that could provide proper support; 3.17. the mother continues to show signs of ambivalence regarding the responsibility of caring for a child; 3.18. the mother reports that she is not ready to care for the child, that she is scared and anxious; 3.19. initially, Mr.

B was denying being the child’s father; 3.20. on March 6 th , 2015, Mr. B received conclusive DNA test results; 3.21. Mr. B wants to be involved but he works full-time and is not in a position to take care of the child at this point (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 4 ] The case was first scheduled to proceed on April 2, 2015. However, the Director requested a postponement and sought provisional measures under

article 76.1 of the Youth Protection Act and recommended that the child be entrusted to her putative paternal grandparents. [ 5 ] The mother, though not strongly opposed to the Director’s main recommendation, explained that she would prefer to have her daughter in her care, with her own mother’s assistance. [ 6 ] Having heard the evidence adduced at the hearing for provisional measures, the Court entrusted the child to her putative paternal grandparents, as it appears from the Court record, considering their stability, their commitment to the child, as well as their willingness to foster close contacts between the child and her mother. [ 7 ] The hearing on the merits was scheduled to proceed on June 29, 2015. [ 8 ] Given positive developments in the situation, the Director then recommended that the child be entrusted to her father with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, for a period of nine months and each of the parties expressed their consent to the proposed measures. [ 9 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-1 to D-6 as evidence: D-1: Birth certificate of the child; D-2: Court Report, prepared by [social worker 1], dated June 19, 2015; D-3: Douglas Mental Health University Institute Medical notes concerning the mother (filed under

section 294.1 C.p.c.); D-4: Jewish General Hospital medical notes in the child’s file (filed under

section 294.1 C.p.c.); D-5: Putative father’s parental capacity assessment, prepared by Dr. Catherine Cloutier, dated March 27, 2015 (filed under

section 294.1 C.p.c.); D-6: Parental capacity assessment of the mother, prepared by Dr. Catherine Cloutier, dated March 30, 2015 (filed under

section 294.1 C.p.c.). [ 10 ] In

summary, despite the uncertainty and ambivalence regarding the child’s future shortly after her birth, her parents have shown a remarkable willingness to collaborate to put the child’s interests first. Both parents essentially admit the allegations, acknowledge the serious risk of neglect and express their desire to do what is best for the child. [ 11 ] Although the child's father is not declared on the child's birth certificate, conclusive DNA test results establish that Mr. B is the child’s father.

He is taking steps to have his paternity legally recognized and it is not disputed. [ 12 ] Although unprepared to take on parenting responsibilities, the father is committed to caring for the child and undertakes to participate in parenting classes and do whatever is necessary to meet his child’s daily needs.

He can also count on the support of his own parents with whom he enjoys a close relationship. [ 13 ] The mother also acknowledges her difficulties, although she feels they may appear to be somewhat exaggerated. [ 14 ] She approves of her child being in her father’s care and has frequent positive contacts with the child. [ 15 ] It will be essential to remain vigilant to respond to the child’s growing needs and to quickly identify any potential developmental delays or difficulties, more particularly as a result of the child’s exposure to alcohol in the womb. [ 16 ] Under the circumstances, given the admissions and consent expressed by each of the parties, the Court is satisfied that the

motion is well-founded and that the measures are in the child's interest. THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 17 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 18 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child, X , are compromised under

section 38 b) 2) of the Youth Protection Act ; AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE CHILD'S INTEREST TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 19 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to the care of her father, Mr. B; [ 20 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that Mr.

B is currently residing in his own parents’ home with the child; [ 21 ] ORDERS the frequency and modality of contacts between the child and her mother be determined by consent amongst the parties and failing such consent, that such contacts occur minimally twice a week; [ 22 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother continue to take steps to address her personal issues regarding mental health, substance abuse as well as personal family issues; [ 23 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE of her agreement to do so; [ 24 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents follow the recommendations in their respective Parental Capacity Assessments; [ 25 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE of their undertaking to do so; [ 26 ] RECOMMENDS that the child be closely monitored for any signs of Foetal Alcohol Syndrome and receive services, if necessary as soon as possible; [ 27 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to obtain and share relevant information with the family’s service providers TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE of the parents’ consent; [ 28 ] ORDERS that a person working for Youth and Family Centres A provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her family; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X, to the Director of Youth Protection of Youth and Family Centres A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 30 ] THE WHOLE for a period of nine months.

TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. Me Edith Zavodni Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Alec Fafard Attorney for the child TD/vl