2012 QCCQ 11177, 2012 QCCQ 11177

Protection de la jeunesse — 123698 2012 QCCQ 11177 COURT OF QUEBEC Canada PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF […] Youth Court Division No: 760-41-004123-116 DATE: March 12, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE BEATRICE CLEMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X Born : […], 2001 DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION OF LE CENTRE JEUNESSE A Petitioner -and- A -and- B Parents of the child ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ CAUTION : The Youth Protection Act provides that within the framework of this Act, no person may publish or broadcast information allowing a child or the child's parents to be identified.

Whomsoever contravenes this

article is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine [articles 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.].

[ 1 ] A motion for protection is submitted to the Court concerning X, born on […], 2001. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection alleges that the security and the development of the youth are in danger as he is subject to psychological ill-treatment, as detailed more amply in paragraph 3 of the motion. [ 3 ] As well as other measures of aid and assistance, the Petitioner recommends that X be entrusted to his father and the contacts with his mother be determined upon agreement between the parties. [ 4 ] The Petitioner produces the reports on the analysis of the child's social situation as evidence (pièces D-3 et D-4) in lieu of the testimony of its author.

The admissions of the parties as to the motion are noted in the Court record and they indicate their assent as to the measures proposed by the Director. [ 5 ] After a 10-year relationship, the parents separate in 2007. Since then, at different periods, X has resided with each parent. Each parent has resigned custody to the other in regard to his difficult behaviours. At the time of the evaluation, X is residing with his mother, her partner Mr. C, and his 2 sons.

He visits his father every second weekend. [ 6 ] The parents have a conflictual relationship and any issues concerning X are usually mediated by their respective spouses. [ 7 ] X is diagnosed with ADHD (attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder) and ODD (oppositional defiant disorder). He attends A Elementary School and functions well academically. No behavioural issues are noted. [ 8 ] At his mother's home, X is subject to inappropriate parenting techniques and excessive discipline.

The mother 's spouse is the authoritarian in the household and insists on strict adherence to the rules established in the home, of which the following examples merit being noted: • The child is regularly punished and sent to his room for several hours, during which time he is not allowed to touch his toys, watch television or read books; • He is not allowed to look up or speak during mealtimes; • His showers are timed and supervised; • He has a bed time of 7 p.m. and is given sleeping pills to help him sleep; • He is not allowed to bring home gifts received from his father; [ 9 ] The mother and her spouse insist that the rules in their home are necessary to assure structure and compliance by the children under their care, and particularly for X, as he has recurring behavior issues. [ 10 ] The family was followed by a CLSC social worker as of January 2011 and it is noted that there was a rapid disregard of the recommendations and resurgence of their disciplinary techniques.

Mr. C is described as being hyper-reactive and rejecting of X, believing him to be schizophrenic. [ 11 ] The child is confused, unable to comprehend the reasoning behind the rules at his mother's home or why the rules are different in each of his parent's households.

Behaviors, which are accepted and encouraged in his father's household, are prohibited at his mother's (ex. interacting at the supper table). [ 12 ] X's basic needs for a stable environment, coherent and proportional rules, and affection are not being adequately met in the mother's household, as the focus is on control, instead of understanding and addressing his specific issues.

The result is that X feels inadequate and rejected. [ 13 ] X functions well in his school setting as well as at his father's home, which contradicts the foundation of the mother's reasoning for the strict rules in her household. [ 14 ] Both parents collaborate with the evaluation and the mother is open to make changes in the structure at her home, although she continues to minimize the excessive nature of the discipline and its negative impact on her son. [ 15 ] The principle goal of the intervention will be to reassure X in his relationship with his mother and eventually, her milieu. [ 16 ] The Court determines that the security and the development of the child are in danger in virtue of

article 38

c) of the Youth Protection Act , as he is subject to psychological ill treatment. Furthermore, the recommendations forwarded by the Director of Youth Protection are appropriate and in his best interests. [ 17 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 18 ] GRANTS the present motion; [ 19 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child are in danger; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to his father; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the mother and the child be upon mutual agreement between the parties;

[ 22 ] TAKES ACT that these contacts at the present time are being effectuated at the maternal grand-parents' home every second week-end; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the parents undertake an active

part in the application of the measures designed to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is in danger; [ 24 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counseling or assistance to the child and his parents for a period of one (1) year; [ 25 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection of Le Centre jeunesse A for the execution of the measures; __________________________________ BEATRICE CLEMENT, J.C.Q. Me Mylène Francoeur Attorney for the Petitioner Me Michel Robert Attorney for the mother Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the child Date of hearing: March 12, 2012