2013 QCCQ 19713, 2013 QCCQ 19713

Protection de la jeunesse — 138347 2013 QCCQ 19713 JC0B11 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY […] Youth Court Division No: 760-41-004415-132 DATE: December 20, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X Born : [...], 1998 Adolescent THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION OF LE CENTRE JEUNESSE A Petitioner -and- A -and- B Parents JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ CAUTION : The Youth Protection Act provides that within the framework of this Act, no person may publish or broadcast information allowing a child or the child's parents to be identified.

Whomsoever contravenes this

article is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine [articles 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.]. [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection presents a motion for extension of the Court order rendered on April 2, 2013 concerning X, born on [...], 1998. [ 2 ] The previous judgment declares that the security and the development of the adolescent are in danger due to a situation of psychological ill treatment and serious behavioural disturbances.

Protective measures are put in place for six months, notably the entrustment of the adolescent in a reception center. [ 3 ] Initially, the Director recommends the extension of the measures for a further period of six months, maintaining the adolescent in a reception center.

[ 4 ] The parties consign their admissions to the Court file. While consenting to the extension of protective measures, the parents and the adolescent submit that her residence in a structured setting is no longer pertinent and request her return to the home environment. [ 5 ] ANALYSIS AND DECISION [ 6 ] Since February 28, 2013, the adolescent resides in a reception center setting. [ 7 ] While in placement, the adolescent is generally calm and collaborative. Many of the problematic behaviours leading to her placement are no longer present, namely delinquency, drug use or running away.

She implicates herself in her studies and forwards positive goals. Her remaining difficulties center around self-mutilation and suicidal ideations, and the sources therein. [ 8 ] X recognizes having frequent urges to hurt herself and to cutting herself on a daily basis, often without telling anyone. Since her placement, these incidents intensify. One incident dating from August 2013 shows the adolescent cutting herself from elbow to wrist on both arms, as well as on her thighs.

She cannot explain the reasons motivating these behaviours and states that these behaviours help soothe her anxieties. [ 9 ] In July 2013, a psychiatric evaluation concludes that the adolescent doesn't present a mental illness, but suffers from an adjustment disorder. The evaluation recommends individual psychotherapy, as well as a therapeutic process for the parents. [ 10 ] The adolescent commences her psychological follow-up on a weekly basis in September. Through this psychotherapy, she learns healthy coping mechanisms to counter her anxiety and consequent urges to harm herself.

She testifies to significantly reducing the incidents of cutting herself, in frequency as well as intensity. [ 11 ] The mother also starts consulting a social worker with A organism . The father chooses not to participate in the follow-ups. [ 12 ] Overall, the parent's involvement is positive and they work towards finding solutions to their daughter's difficulties.

Exasperation leads to the father's collaboration with the intervention waning as of the summer. [ 13 ] The parents minimize the difficulties resonating from their conjugal relationship and show no interest in seeking professional support in this regard. They make efforts to express themselves in adequate ways and refer to the caseworker for advice in this regard.

The evidence shows that there are no incidents of physical altercations between the parents since the last order, although elements of tension remain, which continue to impact on their daughter. [ 14 ] Through the application of measures, the adolescent's relationship with her parents shows significant improvement. She visits home every weekend. [ 15 ] On October 25, 2013, the Court hears the parties and after evaluating the evidence, declares that the security and the development of the adolescent remain in danger.

The Court orders interim measures in order to verify the capacity of the parties to maintain their efforts to stabilize their situations, more notably, that X continue her psychotherapy and demonstrate her ability to put an end to the incidents of self-mutilation. [ 16 ] At the final hearing, the parties submit that although the adolescent's situation remains in danger, there is no longer any need for rehabilitation in the structured setting of a reception center.

To this end, the following facts are put forth: • X continues her weekly sessions with her psychologist, and becomes more successful in communicating her emotions to her parents and applies appropriate ways to deal with her urges to mutilate herself; • There are no further incidents of self-mutilation since September 7 th ; • The mother continues her meetings with a social worker at A organism.

The father agrees to participate in some meetings; • The family dynamic improves, with the parents being more constant and coherent in their relationship with their daughter; • A childcare worker offers services to the family, mostly in relation to the communication between X and her father. [ 17 ] The Court concurs that the comprehensive services, in conjunction with the efforts of the family, result in the situation being sufficiently stable to justify her return home. The parties recognize the benefits of the services put in place.

The presence of the Director remains pertinent in the view of shouldering the adolescent and her family in the respect the intervention plan, as well as to support them in the application of healthy coping strategies and communication. [ 18 ] After evaluating the evidence, the Court endorses the measures suggested by the Director of Youth Protection, which are the reflection of the adolescent's best interest, while concurrently receiving the approval of the parties. [ 19 ] FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the motion for extension; [ 21 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the adolescent are still in danger; [ 22 ] EXTENDS the Court order rendered on April 2, 2013; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to her parents; [ 24 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or a body provides aid, counselling and assistance to the youth and her family;

[ 25 ] ORDERS that the adolescent received specific health care and health services, namely that she continues her follow-up with A organism ; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and her parents take an active

part in the application of the measures; [ 27 ] ALL THESE MEASURES for 6 months; [ 28 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre jeunesse A for the execution of the measures. __________________________________ BEATRICE CLEMENT, J.C.Q. Me Mylène Francoeur Attorney for the Petitioner Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the adolescent Date of hearing: October 25 2013 and December 20, 2013