r v. A, 2014 QCCQ 16375

Protection de la jeunesse — 144452 2014 QCCQ 16375 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-41-004235-126 760-41-004344-126 DATE: May 21, 2014 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X, born [...] , 2011 Y , born [...] , 2012 Children ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION OF LE CENTRE JEUNESSE A Petitioner v.

A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 presents amended motions for extension of a Court decision rendered on December 6, 2013, concerning the siblings X and Y , born respectively on [...] , 2011 and [...] , 2012. [ 2 ] The previous decision orders the extension of protective measures in regards to the siblings for 6 months, more notably that they remain in foster care.

The mother's contacts with her children are subject to supervision, as well as conditional to 3 meetings with the Director to assess her personal situation and degree of involvement. The Court further prohibits contacts between the children and other members of their family. [ 3 ] The Director seeks to prolong the measures for an additional period of 9 months, alleging notably the parent's lack of investment and continued inabilities to assume their children's needs.

As well, the Director requests that the Court forbid contacts to both parents and take act of the elaboration of an alternate life plan for the children. [ 4 ] After seeking the parties' positions, the Court proceeds jointly as to the pending motions. [ 5 ] Both parents are absent; the evidence demonstrates that they receive service of the proceedings and are aware of the hearing date. The Court proceeds in the interests of the children. [ 6 ] The attorney for the mother is present and consigns her clients' position in the court record.

She offers no contest as to the extension of the measures, but underlines that her client is not in agreement with the prohibition of contacts, nor the elaboration of an alternate life plan.

The attorney for the children agrees to the motions and additionally requests that the Court specifically designate the foster families with whom the children are presently living. [ 7 ] Context [ 8 ] Since the last court order, the children continue to evolve positively in their respective foster families, with whom they create secure and significant attachments. [ 9 ] The father remains largely uninvolved in his children's lives. The Director's efforts to communicate with him since December

2013 are in vain. His contacts, already irregular, cease once the parent's separate in March 2013. [ 10 ] The mother has no contacts with her children, the conditions of the court order not having been met (3 meetings with the caseworker). [ 11 ] The mother meets with the caseworker on one occasion, on January 10 th . At this meeting, the mother expresses her wish to regain the custody of her children, when explained the Director's intention to clarify a life plan. She minimizes the reasons leading to the application of protective measures as well as the impact of her absence in the children's lives.

She further refuses to give her authorization that Y travel with his foster family, stating that he is her child and can't travel without her. [ 12 ] Since that meeting, the mother is largely unreachable and doesn't respond to requests for further meetings. [ 13 ] On February 27 th 2014, the Court renders a provisional order permitting the Director to sign the authorizations for travel purposes.

The parents are absent. [ 14 ] Both parents fail to respond to the intervention plan, nor are they present at the revision meeting, although the Director provides them notification in writing. [ 15 ] In February 2014, a life-plan decisional committee targets adoption as meeting the best interests of the children and the Director states her intention to commence proceedings to this effect, within the timeframe of the protective measures sought. [ 16 ] One week before the present hearing, the mother phones the caseworker and asks to see her children. [ 17 ] Analysis and Decision [ 18 ] The previous judgment already identifies that the children's best interests, in conjunction with the period of placement, justify the elaboration of alternate life plans.

Since that time, the situation remains static, as the parents continue to be absent from their children's lives and fail to cooperate with the measures designed to put an end to the situation of endangerment. [ 19 ] The children, however, create familial bonds with their foster families, referring and depending on them as their parental figures. Considering the various factors pertaining to the children, the Court ascertains that the parents no longer hold a significant role in their lives. [ 20 ] The application of protective measures since April 2012, are insufficient to remedy the elements of endangerment.

The parent's lack of investment and the children's acquired stability, dictate that it would be perilous to permit a renewal of contacts. Consequently, the Court forbids these contacts. [ 21 ] The Court ascertains the expiration of the maximum delays of provisional placement provided for in the Youth Protection Act (article 91.1), and that furthermore, there is no evidence of the imminent rehabilitation of the parent's situations.

Consequently, the Court is bound by the requirements of the law, which provide more particularly the following: If the security or development of the child is still in danger at the expiry of the periods specified in the first paragraph, the tribunal must make an order aimed at ensuring continuity of care, stable relationships and stable living conditions corresponding to the child's needs and age on a permanent basis. [ 22 ] Considering that the Director identifies an alternate life-plan for the children and affirms the intention to proceed shortly in this vein, the Court stays a permanency order at this time, while giving act to the request that the parties intend to maintain the children in their current foster families. [ 23 ] FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 24 ] GRANTS the motions for extension of a court decision; [ 25 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the children are still in danger; [ 26 ] EXTENDS the Court order rendered on December 6, 2013 in the present files; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the children be entrusted to a foster family chosen by Le Centre jeunesse A for a period of 9 months; [ 28 ] TAKES ACT that the Director of Youth Protection intends to maintain the children in their current foster families in their best interests, namely: ➢ X , in the care of C and D ; ➢ Y : in the care of E and F ; [ 29 ] FORBIDS any contact between the children and their parents; [ 30 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or a body provides aid, counselling and assistance to the children and their family for a period of 9 months; [ 31 ] WITHDRAWS the exercise of certain rights of parental authority from the father and AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to sign the authorizations required for medical, school, leisure or travel purposes, including the application for a passport; [ 32 ] WITHDRAWS the exercise of certain rights of parental authority from the mother and AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth

Protection to sign the authorizations required for medical, school, leisure or travel purposes, including the application for a passport, and this, should the mother failed to respond to such a request within 48 hours; [ 33 ] ORDERS that the parents of the children take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 34 ] ORDERS that the children's parents report in person at regular intervals to the Director of Youth Protection to inform of their current situation; [ 35 ] TAKES ACT that the Director of Youth Protection will elaborate an alternate life plan for the children; [ 36 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre Jeunesse A for the execution of the measures. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Mylène Francoeur Attorney for the Petitioner Me Claudette Morin Attorney for the mother Me Stéphanie Castagnier Attorney for the children Date of hearing: May 21, 2014