2015 QCCQ 19018, 2015 QCCQ 19018

Protection de la jeunesse — 159726 2015 QCCQ 19018 COUR DU QUÉBEC CHAMBRE DE LA JEUNESSE CANADA PROVINCE DE QUÉBEC DISTRICT DE [...] N° : 525-41-028715-142 DATE : Le 24 septembre 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ SOUS LA PRÉSIDENCE DE L’HONORABLE LUCIE GODIN, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ Dans la situation de : X Née le [...] 2011 Enfant intimée Directrice de la protection de la jeunesse du Centre jeunesse A Requérante - et - A - et - B Parents intimés ______________________________________________________________________ JUGEMENT

Article 95 L.P.J. ______________________________________________________________________ MISE EN GARDE : La

Loi sur la protection de la jeunesse interdit la publication ou la diffusion de toute information permettant d'identifier un enfant ou ses parents.

Quiconque contrevient à cette disposition est passible d'une amende. [articles 11.2.1 et 135 L.P.J .] [ 1 ] Le présent jugement constitue la version écrite et motivée confirmant le jugement rendu oralement lors de l'audience tenue le 24 septembre 2015. [ 2 ] Le Tribunal est saisi d’une requête en révision de l'ordonnance rendue le 6 octobre 2014, dans laquelle il confiait l'enfant à ses grands-parents paternels, prenant acte que le père vivait avec ses parents, et ordonnait certaines autres mesures visant à corriger la situation, le tout pour une période d'une (1) année. [ 3 ] Depuis le prononcé de l'ordonnance, la requérante, la Directrice de la protection de la jeunesse («DPJ»), allègue que des faits nouveaux sont survenus et qu'ils justifient une révision de l'ordonnance. [ 4 ] La DPJ allègue que l'enfant reçoit réponse à ses besoins auprès de ses grands-parents paternels, que la situation des parents n'a pas changé et, en conséquence, recommande au Tribunal de prolonger l'ordonnance préalablement rendue et de confier l'enfant à ses grands-parents paternels. [ 5 ] Le père, par le biais de son procureur Me Josée Lefebvre, admet l'essentiel des faits allégués dans la requête et exprime par ailleurs son accord avec les recommandations. [ 6 ] La mère admet l'essentiel des faits allégués par la requérante et exprime son accord avec les recommandations. [ 7 ] Tenant compte des admissions formulées par la mère, le père et la preuve documentaire, le Tribunal conclut que les faits survenus depuis le prononcé de l'ordonnance justifient une révision pour les motifs allégués. [ 8 ] Le Tribunal retient les éléments suivants : [ 9 ] The child remained under the care of the paternal grandparents; [ 10 ] The child is reported to be doing well; [ 11 ] The child attends daycare daily;

[ 12 ] The father continues to reside with the paternal grandparents; [ 13 ] The mother's whereabouts remain unknown; [ 14 ] From DYP's point of view, the situation of the parents remain basically the same; from the parents' point of view, their situation has improved; [ 15 ] The paternal grandparents are being evaluated to become a foster family; [ 16 ] The parent's contacts with the child were inconsistent but father testifies to the fact that he is living with his own parents, the paternal grandparents, Mr. C and Mrs.

D, so he does have regular contacts with X whom he sees every day. [ 17 ] Mesures [ 18 ] In a report dated September 18, 2015, Ms [Social Worker 1], designated by DYP in the present situation, sign a report [1] where she assess the situation in the following terms : « Mr. C, X's grandfather, reported that X is well. She is a healthy and curious four year old girl. She attends daycare and she has started kindergarten at [school A] five days a week. After school she returns to the daycare until her grandmother picks her up. Mr.

C stated that both he and his wife are prepared to provide a home for X as they also care for X's sister, Y (age 6), who has always lived with them. Mr. C stated that he is prepared to support his son, Mr. B, as long as he needs help. The family is being provided with support services from the City A Social Services. Mr. B has stated his commitment to gain sole custody. Although he has retained a legal aid lawyer, Mr. B has not (as) given the lawyer a mandate to proceed with the custody plan. This delegate has tried to impress on Mr.

B the importance of demonstrating his commitment to the plan by following through on his stated goal. Mr. B's parents remain committed to their granddaughter's best interest. They have stated that if their son, B, does not follow through on the custody plan, (and) they are prepared to seek custody of her. Both Ms. [Social Worker 3], the team leader, and Ms. [Social Worker 4], the social support assistant, report that the grandparents are respected members in City A. They are able to care for all her needs and they do so in a consistent manner.

Both workers that it is in their culture that family members take care of one another for long period of time. Ms. [Social Worker 3] and Ms. [Social Worker 4] are confident that the grandparents would take exceptional care of X as they do X's sister, Y.

Both workers added that the family are always cooperative with them and always attend meetings when they are requested to do so. » [ 19 ] C'est pourquoi, après avoir évalué l'ensemble de la situation, la preuve documentaire, la position exprimée par les parents, le Tribunal conclut que les recommandations formulées par l'intervenante dans son rapport déposé sous la cote D3 sont dans l'intérêt de l'enfant. [ 20 ] Par ailleurs, les grands-parents paternels sont des personnes significatives pour l'enfant au sens de l'article 4 de la

Loi sur la protection de la jeunesse et le Tribunal leur confie l'enfant en vertu de l'article 91e) de la LPJ . [ 21 ] CONSEQUENTLY, THE COURT : [ 22 ] CONCLUDES that the situation of the child has to be extended for the reasons that were alleged in the evaluation; [ 23 ] GRANTS the petition; [ 24 ] ENTRUSTS the child X to the paternal grandparents under sections 4 and 91e) of the Law; [ 25 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that the paternal grandparents have been assessed and received a foster home status under the «Loi sur la représentation des ressources familiales et de certaines ressources intermédiaires et sur le régime de négociations d'une entente collective les concernant» ; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the parents ensure that they do not expose the child to any type of violence; [ 27 ] ORDERS the father to ensure that he is not inebriated in his daughter's presence; [ 28 ] ORDERS that frequency, modalities and duration of contact between the mother and the child be determined by DYP; [ 29 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the child and her family for a period of six (6) months as of today. [ 30 ] Given the fact that father lives Up-North now and the child as well, RECOMMENDS that the file be transferred to City A Social Services as quickly as possible.

Signed at City B, October 30, 2015 __________________________________ LUCIE GODIN, J.C.Q. LG/jv Me Georgia LIMPERIS Lawyer for DYP Me Robert HAMEL Lawyer for the child Me Josée LEFEBVRE Lawyer for the father Date of hearing : September 24, 2015