2017 QCCQ 7915, 2017 QCCQ 7915

Protection de la jeunesse — 173386 2017 QCCQ 7915 COUR DU QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE DE QUÉBEC DISTRICT DE [...] LOCALITÉ DE [...] « Chambre de la jeunesse »

N° : 565-41-000252-177 DATE : 16 mai 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ SOUS LA PRÉSIDENCE DE L’HONORABLE MARIE PRATTE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ LA DIRECTRICE DE LA PROTECTION DE LA JEUNESSE A Demanderesse et X Enfant et A B En qualité de parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUGEMENT (Art. 38 de la Loi sur la protection de la jeunesse ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 (art. 11.2, 11.2.1 et 135 L.P.J.). [ 1 ] Invoquant une situation de risques sérieux de négligence, la Directrice de la protection de la jeunesse demande au Tribunal de déclarer compromis la sécurité et le développement de X, âgé de 5 mois. À

titre de mesures, elle suggère, après avoir amendé ses conclusions le matin de l’audience, un hébergement de quatre mois chez C; elle précise toutefois que si la situation évolue positivement, l’enfant sera intégré progressivement chez ses parents deux mois après le début de la période d’hébergement. Le suivi social sera d’une durée d’un an. [ 2 ] Les parents, qui assistent à l’audience, ne s’opposent pas à la demande et consentent aux mesures proposées.

Le procureur de l’enfant consent lui aussi à la demande. [ 3 ] La fragilité de la situation familiale ressort de la preuve. [ 4 ] L’enfant est né prématurément, le [...] 2016, après 30 semaines de grossesse. Il est hospitalisé, tout comme sa mère, jusqu’au 30 janvier 2017. La mère crée alors un lien avec son fils; le père les visite de temps en temps. Les parents prennent l’un et l’autre bien soin de leur nouveau-né. [ 5 ] Ce dernier a un frère et une sœur et six demi-frères et demi-sœurs.

Aucun d’entre eux ne vit avec la mère ou le père. [ 6 ] Les parents ont en effet un long historique de violence et de consommation abusive. [ 7 ] Leur dernier conflit remonte au mois de juillet 2016. Le père est alors arrêté après avoir commis des voies de fait à l’égard de la mère. Il accepte par la suite d’aller en thérapie et c’est en février 2017 qu’il quitte le centre de traitement. [ 8 ] À la fin de sa thérapie, le père retourne vivre avec la mère. Les parents indiquent être maintenant sobres et ils reçoivent des services afin d’apprendre à gérer leurs émotions.

Ils participent aussi à un suivi auprès du CISSS[A]. Il s’agit d’un groupe de motivation afin de les inciter à maintenir leur sobriété. [ 9 ] La situation familiale progresse donc de façon positive; elle demeure néanmoins fragile. Dans le passé, les parents ont en effet

eu de la difficulté à demeurer sobres et à ne pas retomber dans un cycle de violence. [ 10 ] Ce long historique de violence et de consommation, lié à la très grande vulnérabilité de l’enfant, permet de conclure à l’existence d’une situation de risques sérieux de négligence, que reconnaissent d’ailleurs les parents. [ 11 ] Il est dans l’intérêt de X que les parents démontrent leur capacité à demeurer sobres et à gérer adéquatement leurs émotions avant de reprendre charge de leur fils.

Ils sont prêts à relever le défi. [ 12 ] Par ailleurs, en raison des efforts réels des parents le Tribunal permet le retour progressif de l’enfant dans son milieu familial, dans deux mois, si la situation continue à évoluer positivement. [ 13 ] Le Tribunal n'a donc aucune hésitation à faire droit aux mesures de protection suggérées qui, selon la preuve, sont appropriées à ses besoins. [ 14 ] La demande est fondée; elle est dans l’intérêt de l'enfant et respecte ses droits. [ 15 ] THEREFORE THE COURT: [ 16 ] ALLOWS the application; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the child’s security and development are in danger; [ 18 ] ORDERS the execution of the following protective measures:

a) That the child be entrusted to C for a period of four months and return to the parents, in the last two months, if the situation permits it;

b) That the visits between the child and the parents be according to modalities established by the Director of Youth Protection and the parents;

c) That the parents actively participate in the application of the measures aimed at ending the situation of endangerment, particularly by cooperating with the social worker in the development and application of the intervention plan;

d) That a person working for a CISSS[A] CJ[A] institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and his family for a period of one year; [ 19 ] RECOMMENDS:

a) That the parents undergo therapy for consumption issues and that they follow the recommendations of the professionals;

b) That the parents take

part in a follow-up with regard to their parenting skills;

c) That the parents undergo therapy for anger management and that they follow the recommendations of the professionals; [ 20 ] ACKNOWLEDGES the intention of the Director of Youth Protection to avail herself, if the situation so warrants, of the means provided for in

Section 62 of the Youth Protection Act in order to allow the child’s gradual reintegration into family environment, in the last two months of the placement measure; [ 21 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ MARIE PRATTE, J.C.Q. M e Danielle Pharand Procureure de la Directrice de la protection de la jeunesse M e Nicolas Gravel Procureur de l'enfant M e Louis-André Hubert Procureur de la mère M e Louis-André Hubert Procureur du père Date d’audience : 16 mai 2017 Protection de la jeunesse — 173386 2017 QCCQ 7915 COURT OF QUÉBEC

CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] Youth Division No. 565-41-000252-177 DATE: May 16, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MARIE PRATTE J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION FOR A Applicant and X Child and A B In their capacity as parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (section 95, Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine (sections 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [1] Invoking a situation of a serious risk of neglect, the Director of Youth Protection is asking the Court to declare that the security and development of X, 5 months old, are in danger. The Director, after amending her conclusions on the morning of the hearing, proposed as measures a four-month placement with C.

The Director specified, however, that if the situation progresses positively, the child will be gradually reintegrated into his parents’ home two months after the start of the placement period. Social follow-up will be for one year. [2] The parents, who attended the hearing, did not oppose the application and consented to the measures proposed. The child’s attorney also consented to the application. [3] The evidence shows the fragility of the family situation. [4] The child was born prematurely on […], 2016 after a 30-week pregnancy. Mother and child remained hospitalized until January 30, 2017.

During that time, the mother developed a bond with her son. The father visited them from time to time. The parents each took good care of their newborn. [5] The child has one brother as well as six half-brothers and half-sisters, none of whom live with the mother or the father. [6] The parents have a long history of violence and substance abuse. [7] Their last conflict dates back to July 2016 when the father was arrested for assaulting the mother. He then agreed to undergo therapy.

The father left the treatment centre in February 2017. [8] When the father completed his therapy, he went back to live with the mother. The parents stated that they are now sober and are receiving services in order to learn how to manage their emotions. They are also participating in a follow-up with a CISSS[A] support group in order to help them stay sober. [9] The family situation is therefore progressing positively; nevertheless, it remains fragile.

In the past, the parents have had difficulty staying sober and not falling back into a cycle of violence. [10] This long history of violence and substance abuse, combined with the child’s great vulnerability, makes it possible to conclude that there is a serious risk of neglect which, moreover, the parents have acknowledged. [11] It is in X’s interest that the parents demonstrate their ability to stay sober and adequately manage their emotions before taking back charge of their son. They are prepared to meet this challenge.

[12] Moreover, given the real efforts being made by the parents, the Court allows the child’s gradual reintegration into his family environment in two months, provided the situation continues to progress positively. [13] Therefore, the Court does not hesitate to allow the recommended protective measures which, according to the evidence, are suited to the child’s needs. [14] The application is founded; it is in the child’s interest and in keeping with his rights. [The following passage appears in English in the original French-language judgment.] [15] THEREFORE THE COURT: [16] ALLOWS the application; [17] DECLARES that the child’s security and development are in danger; [18] ORDERS the execution of the following protective measures:

e) That the child be entrusted to C for a period of four months and return to the parents, in the last two months, if the situation permits it;

f) That the visits between the child and the parents be according to modalities established by the Director of Youth Protection and the parents;

g) That the parents actively participate in the application of the measures aimed at ending the situation of endangerment, particularly by cooperating with the social worker in the development and application of the intervention plan;

h) That a person working for a CISSS[A] CJ[A] institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and his family for a period of one year; [19] RECOMMENDS:

d) That the parents undergo therapy for consumption issues and that they follow the recommendations of the professionals;

e) That the parents take

part in a follow-up with regard to their parenting skills;

f) That the parents undergo therapy for anger management and that they follow the recommendations of the professionals; [20] ACKNOWLEDGES the intention of the Director of Youth Protection to avail herself, if the situation so warrants, of the means provided for in

Section 62 of the Youth Protection Act in order to allow the child’s gradual reintegration into family environment, in the last two months of the placement measure; [21] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ MARIE PRATTE J.C.Q. Mtre. Danielle Pharand Counsel for the Director of Youth Protection Mtre. Nicolas Gravel Counsel for the child Mtre. Louis-André Hubert Counsel for the mother Mtre. Louis-André Hubert Counsel for the father Hearing date: May 16, 2017