2022 QCCQ 12439, 2022 QCCQ 12439

Protection de la jeunesse — 227392 2022 QCCQ 12439 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] “Youth Division” No: 614-41-000791-212 DATE: November 23, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE FRANÇOIS STE-MARIE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION and X Born on […], 2018 child and A B parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT

Section 95 of the Youth Protection Act (R.S.Q. c. P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ Warning : The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcast of information allowing a child or the child’s parents to be identified. Every person who contravenes this provision is liable to a fine (sections 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A. ). [ 1 ] In accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act , the Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for the decision rendered from the bench at the hearing held on November 23, 2022. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection (the Director) alleges that it is necessary to revise the order rendered by the Honourable Lucie Godin on December 2, 2021. [ 3 ] Today, the Director recommends that the child remain placed in a foster family for a period of eight months and that support services be ordered for a period of one year. [ 4 ] The mother disagrees with the duration of placement.

She submits that a four-month placement would be sufficient. [ 5 ] The father agrees with the Director’s plan. [ 6 ] The child’s attorney presents that the evidence supports that the child be progressively reintegrated into the mother’s care following a period of four months. Questions in litigation [ 7 ] Are the proposed measures in the child’s best interest and are they respecting her rights? [ 8 ] What should be the placement’s duration? Context and analysis [ 9 ] The child has continued to thrive in her foster family in Town A. X and Y are placed together in the foster family of Ms. C.

Z is in a different family. [ 10 ] The child adapted to her new environment and daily routine.

[ 11 ] From March to August 2022, sporadic visits were organized in the community between the child and the mother. At the end of August, Z reported that other adults were present at home during the visit and that she was afraid of going back to visit her mother. This contravened the rules established with the Youth Protection worker. [ 12 ] For a time, the Youth Protection worker was unable to reach the mother and review this situation. [ 13 ] The mother still struggles with alcohol and drug consumption issues. On September 26, 2022, she informed the Youth Protection worker that she had applied for treatment.

From October 10 to November 10, 2022, she attended the mobile treatment program. She also received support from her community worker. To maintain her sobriety, she is looking to a sponsor and put her name on a waiting list to be seen by a psychologist. Recently, she has been more collaborative with the Director. [ 14 ] The father was incarcerated in July 2022. Since August 31, 2022, he is now participating in a substance abuse program at [the organism A] in Town B. This program should end on March 3, 2023. While in this resource, the father participated in an anger management program.

He reported being sober since July 2022. [ 15 ] On September 21, 2022, the Tribunal ordered, on a provisional basis, that the child be entrusted to a foster family. [ 16 ] The parents’ mobilization is fairly recent. They still have to stabilize their own situation and really address their personal issues before thinking about caring for the child. Consequently, the child’s placement remains necessary. At this point, the evidence supports a placement for a duration of six months.

According to the law, the Director will have discretion to proceed with a progressive reintegration if the situation allows following four months. [ 17 ] Following six months, it will be important for the Tribunal to review the family’s situation.

THEREFORE AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 18 ] GRANTS the application for revision; [ 19 ] DECLARES that the security or the development of the child is still endangered; [ 20 ] REVISES the order rendered on December 2, 2021 by the Honourable Lucie Godin; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the child remain in foster family; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modalities of contacts between the child and her parents be determined by the Director of Youth Protection with supervision if deemed necessary; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the parents collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection and meet with the worker upon request; [ 24 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother engage in an aftercare plan; [ 25 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents seek counseling sessions; [ 26 ] RECOMMENDS that the father complete his substance treatment program and attend an aftercare plan; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the parents ensure to refrain from all forms of violence in the presence of the child; [ 28 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to obtain and share information with all service providers working with the child and the family as for their attendance and progress; [ 29 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and her family; [ 30 ] ORDERS that any police officer collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection when requested to do so; [ 31 ] THE WHOLE for a period of six months; [ 32 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ François Ste-Marie, J.C.Q.

Written and signed on January 6, 2023 /cd Mtre Adélia Ferreira Counsel for the Director of Youth Protection Mtre Yan Massé Counsel for the child Mtre Justine Bergeron Counsel for the mother Mtre Marie-Josée Ayoub Counsel for the father

Date of hearing: November 23, 2022