2017 QCCQ 8500, 2017 QCCQ 8500

Protection de la jeunesse — 173396 2017 QCCQ 8500 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] Youth Division No. 635-41-000730-165 DATE: January 30, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE RENÉE LEMOINE J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on [...], 2001 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in City A, District A Applicant and A, residing and domiciled in City A, District A Mother and B, unknown address Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ( sections 38 and 75 , Youth Protection Act , CQLR, 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 guilty of 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 submitted to the Court a motion for protection under

section 38 (d) (1) of the Youth Protection Act for the child X, born on [...], 2001. [ 2 ] The applicant also submitted a motion for protection under

section 38 (

c) of the Youth Protection Act for the child Y, born on [...], 2015. [ 3 ] The mother of both children was not present at the hearing for health reasons. [ 4 ] The admissions of the child X and the evidence from the occurrence report, dated June 15, 2016 to October 20, 2016, submitted by the police station in City A, revealed the following facts. [ 5 ] On October 12, 2016, the police had to intervene at the mother’s place for conjugal violence between the mother and her boyfriend, Mr. C. Both were intoxicated by alcohol.

The mother refused to press charges against her boyfriend that night. [ 6 ] On that same night, the child X received a message on Facebook from Mr. C offering her $100 in exchange for sexual favours. The child showed the message to the police. [ 7 ] Two days later, the child X was medevaced to City B because she had suicidal ideation. [ 8 ] The mother informed the applicant on October 19, 2016, that she was aware of an incident where Mr. C had sexually assaulted her daughter. Even if the mother was informed of such abuse, she did not take any steps to protect her daughter or prevent such abusive behaviour.

She admitted leaving her daughter alone at home with her boyfriend on many occasions. [ 9 ] In fact, even with the information she had about the past behaviour of her boyfriend, she denied the risk of sexual abuse toward her daughter. [ 10 ] In regards to the child Y, the mother cooperates with youth protection. She is protective of her son who is also the biological son of Mr. C. [ 11 ] In the situation of X, she chooses her current boyfriend instead of being protective of her daughter. [ 12 ] On November 2, 2016, the applicant met C and he expressed he loved the child X and wanted to have kids with her.

He mentioned he had to take medication. He had delirious verbalization. He believes that the pills talked with the social worker and that the

social worker spoke with the detention centre. [ 13 ] On November 2, 2016, the applicant received confirmation that C has had a diagnosis of schizophrenia since 2004. He is also known to have alcohol and cannabis issues. [ 14 ] On November 3, the child X disclosed in her statement to the police that Mr. C attempted to have sex with her four or five times by touching her and invited her. [ 15 ] The Court declares that the security of the child X is in danger under

section 38 (d) (1) of the Youth Protection Act because she has been sexually abused. [ 16 ] For the child Y, the situation is quite different. His security and development are in danger considering the conjugal violence he has been exposed to in the family environment. The security and development of the child are in danger under

section 38 (

c) of the Youth Protection Act . APPLICABLE MEASURES For the child X [ 17 ] She needs a protective environment and her mother cannot provide her with a safe place at home.

The mother has decided to stay with her boyfriend and minimizes the impact of the sexual abuse on her daughter. [ 18 ] The recommendations of the youth protection services is to entrust the child X to a foster home with a possibility of returning to the mother’s home if the situation evolves positively. [ 19 ] The main objective of the measure is to give the child the possibility of growing up in an environment free of any kind of violence, including sexual abuse. The mother will have to cooperate and learn how to protect her daughter.

For the child Y [ 20 ] The recommendation is for the child to remain with his mother. She cooperates with youth protection and is protective of her son. [ 21 ] The main objective is for the mother to work to provide an environment free from violence and alcohol consumption. FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: In the situation of X [ 22 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 23 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X, born on [...], 2001, are in danger according to

section 38 (d) (1) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre with a possibility of returning to her mother’s home; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the child and the child’s parents take an active

part in the application of all the measures ordered by the Court; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the child and the child’s parents report in person, at regular intervals, to the Director of Youth Protection to inform him of the current situation; [ 27 ] ORDERS that contact between X and C be prohibited, including through social media; [ 28 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the child’s family; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the child X receive all the professional help required by her situation; [ 30 ] ORDERS that contact between the child and the mother and her siblings be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as to the terms, frequency and level of supervision; [ 31 ] ORDERS the police to cooperate in the execution of this judgment; [ 32 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the [centre A] for the execution of this judgment; [ 33 ] THE WHOLE until September 30, 2017.

In the situation of Y [ 34 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 35 ] DECLARES that the security and development of Y, born on [...], 2015, are in danger;

[ 36 ] ORDERS that the child remain with his mother; [ 37 ] ORDERS that the child’s mother take an active

part in the application of all the measures ordered by the Court; [ 38 ] ORDERS that the child’s mother report in person, at regular intervals, to the Director of Youth Protection to inform him of the current situation; [ 39 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and the child’s family until September 30, 2017; [ 40 ] ORDERS the police to cooperate in the execution of this judgment; [ 41 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of this judgment; [ 42 ] THE WHOLE until September 30, 2017. __________________________________ RENÉE LEMOINE J.C.Q.

Mtre. Kimon Kling Attorney for the child Mtre. Geneviève Apollon Attorney for the applicant Date of hearing: December 1, 2016