2021 QCCQ 10213, 2021 QCCQ 10213

Protection de la jeunesse — 214677 2021 QCCQ 10213 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-002501-200 DATE: May 27, 2021 (written judgment rendered on July 6, 2021) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2019 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...] Applicant and A, residing and domiciled at [...] Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) asks the Court to prolong a decision rendered on September 2, 2020, regarding the child X, born on [...], 2019.

At that date the Court declared the security and development endangered, entrusted the child to a foster family and ordered the reintegration of the child with the mother it the situation allows it, until May 31, 2021. [ 2 ] The DYP submits that the situation does not allow to return the child to his mother and recommended first that he be entrusted to Mr. C and that he be gradually reintegrated under the care of the mother if the situation allows it, until November 30, 2021.

Unfortunately, the biological father gave up just before the hearing and the DYP had to recommend that the child be entrusted to a foster family. Position of the Parties [ 3 ] The mother is present and represented by Me Geneviève Lucas. She recognizes that the security and development of her child are still endangered and she agrees with the measures. [ 4 ] The child is absent, but represented by Me Cassandra Neptune. On her client’s behalf, Me Neptune submits that his situation is still endangered and that the recommended measures are in his best interest.

History of the Situation [ 5 ] On September 2, 2020 , the Court was seized with an application for protection. The child was 13 months old. The family was followed under voluntary measures since June 2020, due to the physical abuse on the older child from the mother. X remained with his mother. In August, the mother went into the water with her son in her amautik deep enough to be submerged and a police officer arrived at the last minute to save the mother and the child. Since that time, the child was entrusted to a foster family.

The mother admitted having suicidal ideation, but did not realize the seriousness of her situation. The mother had no stable place to stay, and she did not collaborate with the DYP. The mother also has an addiction issues. The Court declared that the security and development of the child were endangered [1] and entrusted him to a foster family with a reintegration with the mother if the situation allows it. The Court also ordered that the services of an external educator be provided and that the mother be assessed by a psychologist.

Facts [ 6 ] After the last decision, the child was entrusted to the specialized foster family in Town A. The caregivers confirmed that he developed very well and he had very good motor skills for a child of his age. [ 7 ] The child remained there until February 12, 2021, when he was entrusted under his biological father’s care in Town B. Indeed, his biological father came in visit in Town A and requested for a visit. The visit went very well and he quickly requested that the child be entrusted to him.

His spouse was also very happy to receive the child. [ 8 ] Unfortunately, the couple had to deal with the loss of their daughter. The biological father mentioned having emotional

difficulties to take care of X and also financial difficulties. The biological father informed the DYP about the facts he would have to give up as it is too hard and also mentioned that his sister would be available to foster the child on a long term basis. During the sister’s assessment, the biological father’s spouse said agreeing to keep the child, so the child remained there until the date of hearing, when the biological father announced that he will keep the child only until another foster family is found. [ 9 ] On her side, the mother showed great motivation at the beginning of the hearing.

She said that she would like to change her way of life to be able to resume the care of her children. An important issue for her was the fact that she had no place to stay. She was living at her brother’s place who sexually abused her when she was young and who force her to drink and to take drugs. She was conscious that it was not a suitable place for her children. [ 10 ] The mother started a new relationship, and she is living at her boyfriend’s place. She is currently pregnant and the couple is waiting the new born in [...] 2021.

This relation appears to be positive for the mother, but as she stopped her good collaboration, it had not been possible to assess her new living conditions. [ 11 ] Regarding the contact with her child, the mother did not show any interest to have contacts during the measures. Despite the request she made at the beginning to have a calendar with 3 weekly visits for the duration of 3 hours each, she exercised only a few and most of those contacts were exercised following the DYP worker’s intervention. [ 12 ] That being said those visits were always positive.

The mother interacted well with the child who was always happy to see her. [ 13 ] As ordered by the Court, the mother was also assessed by Dr. Beltempo, psychologist, at the beginning of the measures. As noted by the DYP worker at that moment, the mother’s motivation was well present. But the psychologist also noted that the mother is suffering from many traumas from her childhood which prevent her from being emotionally available. He also notes that she is very young and immature in some aspects of her life and he recommended prioritizing life skills interventions.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 14 ] GRANTS the application; [ 15 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2019, are still endangered; [ 16 ] ENTRUSTS the child to a foster family chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre; [ 17 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE of the fact that Mr.

C is able to continue to foster the child until the Director of Youth Protection find a foster family for him; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the child be gradually reintegrated under the care of the mother if the situation allows it; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the mother report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures she applies in her own regard or in her child’s regard to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the child are endangered; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the mother take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the mother remain sober and without any violent behaviour in the presence of the child; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the modalities, the frequency, and the degree of supervision of the contacts between the child and the mother be determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 23 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the family; [ 24 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X , to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 25 ] THE WHOLE until November 30, 2021. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Adèle Cyr, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Me Geneviève Lucas, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: May 27, 2021