2019 QCCQ 19954, 2019 QCCQ 19954

Protection de la jeunesse — 198099 2019 QCCQ 19954 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] “Youth Division” No: 525-41-032492-175 DATE: October 15, 2019 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE FRANÇOIS STE-MARIE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION and X Born on […], 2008 child and A mother ______________________________________________________________________ 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 11.2, 11.2.1 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 October 15, 2019. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection (the Director) alleges that an extension and revision of the order rendered on June 16, 2017 is necessary. [ 3 ] On December 12, 2017, the Tribunal ordered the provisional compulsory foster care of the child in a foster family. [ 4 ] On April 13, 2018, the parties agreed to interim measures with the goal of increasing and normalizing contacts between the child and the mother.

The hearing was continued on July 3, 2018. [ 5 ] On July 3, 2018, the Director recommended that on an interim basis, the child remain entrusted to a foster family until October 15, 2018. This recommendations was contested by the mother and the child’s attorney. [ 6 ] The Tribunal heard the testimonies of Ms. B, educator, and Ms. [Social Worker 1], Youth Protection worker.

An interim order was rendered until December 13, 2018, authorizing the child’s reintegration to the mother’s care during the month of July and August 2018. [ 7 ] On December 13, 2018, the hearing had to be postponed as the Director received a new signalement concerning the child’s situation.

The hearing set for June 17, 2019 had to be cancelled due to administrative considerations. [ 8 ] Today, the Director recommends that the child remain entrusted to the mother’s care and that support measures be ordered for the coming year. [ 9 ] The mother and the child would have preferred a shorter period of social follow-up but they are essentially in agreement with the Director’s plan. Question in litigation [ 10 ] Are the proposed measures in the child’s best interest and are they respecting her rights?

Context and Analysis [ 11 ] In June 2017, the mother stopped taking her medication for anxiety and depression. She has not returned to see her doctor regarding her anxiety and depression symptoms. [ 12 ] Following 3 sessions, the mother stopped her counseling at the CLSC. [ 13 ] On November 14, 2017, the mother was charged with sexual assault and with having sexual contact with a child under 16. On May 14, 2019, she was acquitted of these accusations. [ 14 ] The mother completed an eight week program at [organism A]. She reported being sober since June 2017.

She underwent three random drug and alcohol tests that came back negative, the last test being on November 28, 2017. On March 16, 2018, the mother was asked to undertake a random drug test but she did not go stating that she did not have the means to go to the laboratory. She reported that, for a short period, she attended AA meetings. She has presented sober to all visits with the children. Since March 2018, the Director has not requested any other random drug and alcohol testing from the mother. [ 15 ] In January 2018, the mother took

part in parenting group sessions. The mother stopped attending as she preferred working directly with an educator. The mother and Ms. B established a privileged relationship where healthy and open discussions took place. Ms. B observed that the mother showed some difficulties in following through with different recommendations. [ 16 ] The child had regular visit with the mother. The visits were described as positive. The mother still struggled with implementing a routine for the child. At one point, the mother had a problem with cockroaches in her residence.

She took steps to rectify this situation. [ 17 ] During spring 2018, the mother actively collaborated with the Youth Protection worker. She worked hard on improving the state of her apartment. [ 18 ] The child progressed well in her foster family. Y was residing in the foster family of Ms. C while Z, D and X were residing with Ms. E. Ms. E has been approved as a foster family. [ 19 ] While placed in a foster family, X was performing well in school.

Her foster mother enrolled her in baseball. [ 20 ] On July 3, 2018, even if some work remained for the mother in terms of ensuring a proper structure for the child, the Tribunal considered that a reintegration of the child to the mother’s care was possible. Consequently, an interim order was rendered authorizing the child’s reintegration to the mother’s care during the month of July/August 2018. [ 21 ] Z fully integrated her mother’s care on July 16, 2018. On July 25, 2018, the mother was informed that Z had sent naked pictures of herself to her adolescent uncle. This situation was signaled on July 31, 2018.

A safety plan was completed and put in place. [ 22 ] X and D were fully reintegrated on July 30, 2018. Y returned home on August 14, 2018. [ 23 ] In September 2018, during two unannounced visits of the Youth Protection worker, the house was observed to be in complete disarray and cluttered. [ 24 ] On October 1, 2018, the Youth Protection worker was informed that Mr. F, the mother’s boyfriend, had taken D out of bed and pinned him against the wall as he did not want to go to school. The Youth Protection worker clarified that such behaviours were unacceptable and that Mr.

F and the mother should engage in workshops to learn alternative ways of discipline the children. [ 25 ] On November 24, 2018, the Director received a new signalement as the children were exposed to a physical altercation between their older brother, G and Mr. F. [ 26 ] On May 6, 2019, a situation happened where D refused to go to a meeting. He eventually “trashed” the kitchen. Immediate protective measures were invoked and D was placed in A group home. [ 27 ] On May 8, 2019, the Tribunal dismissed the application of the Director to have D remain in a rehabilitation centre.

On that date, the child returned home to his mother and a new Safety Plan was drafted. Since his return, the mother noticed a change in his behaviours and attitude. He is calmer, more polite and does his chores. [ 28 ] The family has been able to count on the support of Ms. H and Ms. I, educators. [ 29 ] On several occasions, the mother has not been fully transparent with the educators and the Youth Protection worker. She has been minimizing the seriousness of the situation. She has not taken all the steps to implement the agreed safety plans.

She has not yet taken steps to stabilize her own personal issues. [ 30 ] Following her reintegration home, the child adapted well to her new school environment. [ 31 ] She obtained very good academic results. She is very active and takes

part in baseball, basketball, soccer and football. [ 32 ] The mother is proud of her children’s accomplishments. She understands that work need to be done with all the family members. She recognized the hard work accomplished by her Youth Protection worker. [ 33 ] Ms. [Social Worker 1], Youth Protection worker, summarizes the family situation as following: (The mother) has an admirable capacity to be affectionate towards her children, to express how much she loves them and that they are an integral part of the family.

However, (the mother) inability to keep her children safe and limited motivation to access to services is of great concern. Her understanding of the importance of following through safety measures has proven poor. Her emotions also seems to

take over and cloud her judgement regarding establishing priorities in the best interest of the children. Her capacity to exercise self- control of her emotionally-charged reactions in the presence of the children is observed to be limited, creating unnecessary stress for them. [1] [ 34 ] More than one year following the children’s reintegration, the family situation remains volatile and unstable. The mother has to work on providing proper structure to the children and prioritizing their needs. She needs to be transparent and welcomes the proposed support.

THEREFORE AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 35 ] GRANTS the application for extension; [ 36 ] DECLARES that the security or the development of the child is still endangered; [ 37 ] EXTENDS the order rendered on June 16, 2017; [ 38 ] ORDERS that the child remain in the care of the mother; [ 39 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the child is not exposed to any form of violence in the family home; [ 40 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother take steps to address her personal issues (including mental health and medical follow-up) and report her progress to the Director of Youth Protection; [ 41 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE of the mother’s agreement to participate in parenting class and consequently, ORDERS that the mother take steps to improve her parenting skills by participating in a parenting class for teenagers; [ 42 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the medical, dental, and therapeutic needs of the child are met in a timely manner and that any ensuing recommendation be respected; [ 43 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure adequate supervision of the child at all times; [ 44 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the home is maintained in a sanitary and safe manner; [ 45 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and her family, including the services of an educator for as long as deemed necessary; [ 46 ] THE WHOLE for a period of one year; [ 47 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. ___________________________________ François Ste-Marie, J.C.Q.

Written and signed on October 17, 2019 /cd Mtre Isabelle Loranger Counsel for the Director of Youth Protection Mtre Adriana Chafoya-Hunter Counsel for the child Mtre Josée Lefebvre Counsel for the mother Dates of hearing: April 13 and July 3, 2018, October 15, 2019