2012 QCCQ 18365, 2012 QCCQ 18365

Protection de la jeunesse — 127664 2012 QCCQ 18365 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-000843-059 DATE: December 14, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection Worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., working in Town A Applicant and X, born on […], 2002 Child and A Mother and B Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The applicant comes before the Court to ask for the review of a decision rendered on May 24, 2012 by Honourable Lise Gagnon, J.C.Q., who herself reviewed a judgment previously rendered by Honourable Daniel Bédard, J.C.Q. [ 2 ] At the hearing, both the mother and the young boy are present and represented, while the father, absent, indicates in writing that he is not involved in his son’s life and, consequently, that he will not be part of the discussions. [ 3 ] While all the parties agree that the declaration of endangerment must be maintained in X’s situation, they disagree on the measures to be ordered. [ 4 ] The applicant thinks that the child needs to live in a structured environment, such as the one he is currently staying at in the community of A, while mother and son wish that the boy come back to Town A, his birthplace. [ 5 ] We should briefly recall that, at the time of the last judgment, Judge Gagnon observed that the mother was still having alcohol abuse problems and that she was still showing inadequate behaviours which impacted the children negatively. [ 6 ] Concerning X more specifically, her observations suggest that the boy is having behaviour problems resulting, at least in part, from not learning to adjust to an environment where rules and limits are clearly set. [ 7 ] In all likelihood, the circumstances for both mother and child have remained the same. [ 8 ] It seems, indeed, that Ms.

A has not come to grips with the problems mentioned above. [ 9 ] As to her son, many incidents have occurred in the last few months, which show that both supervision and intervention are still needed. [ 10 ] For instance, the boy tends to disregard the rules set by the institution where he is staying, such as curfews, and he has run away from the Reception Centre on many occasions. [ 11 ] In this regard, although the last incident goes back to September 21, 2012, there were four previous instances of such behaviour. [ 12 ] In other respects, last summer, he was caught using cannabis. [ 13 ] This seemed like an isolated incident, despite suspicions by some that it was not.

[ 14 ] Furthermore, just recently, he would have been present when an all-terrain vehicle was stolen, but his involvement level could not be defined or incriminating. [ 15 ] A second event has occurred for which he recognized stealing $ 80 from one of his peers. [ 16 ] What he did with the money is unknown to us, but we know that he no longer has it.

He might have agreed on refund terms from his weekly allowance. [ 17 ] All of this suggests, as mentioned earlier, that it is desirable for his well-being that his placement in a structured environment be maintained. [ 18 ] However, based on the various reports in his file and upon hearing the case, it is suspected that X may be battling with a more serious problem, which it is absolutely necessary to investigate. [ 19 ] It is indeed difficult to grasp the boy’s personality and understand his motivations. [ 20 ] Consequently, a psychological assessment is ordered and, if the professional performing it considers appropriate to investigate further, then the intervention of a psychiatrist shall be required. [ 21 ] The Court wishes to stress that it is of primary importance, at this point, for the Director of Youth Protection to act diligently on this part of the order so that any intervention with X is effective and aimed at his real difficulties. [ 22 ] In a similar way, the Court considers important that contacts between the boy and his family, and his community, be maintained and supported in order for him to develop a desire to get involved in a reintegration process. [ 23 ] He could henceforth develop some degree of motivation that will encourage him to adjust his behaviour. [ 24 ] To conclude, the Court considers appropriate to keep X in his current environment, while quickly undertaking steps for him to be assessed by a psychologist, as mentioned earlier. [ 25 ] The outcome of the assessment will shed light on what actions will be needed thereafter. [ 26 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 27 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 28 ] REVIEWS the decision rendered on May 24, 2012; [ 29 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of X continue to be in danger; [ 30 ] ORDERS that X be placed in a reception centre for a period of six months; [ 31 ] ORDERS that the mother’s access and visitation rights be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 32 ] ORDERS that a psychological assessment of X be conducted as soon as possible and, if the psychologist considers that a psychiatric evaluation is necessary, it should be performed without delay; [ 33 ] ORDERS that the Director of Youth Protection make arrangements for X to make a stay in the community of Town A, as soon possible and if the situation allows; [ 34 ] MAINTAINS all the other conclusions rendered previously if not obsolete; [ 35 ] RECOMMENDS that stays of X in his community of Town A should be encouraged; [ 36 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counsel and assistance to X and his mother; [ 37 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection of the town A for the execution of this judgment; [ 38 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate in the execution of the order. __________________________________ JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS, J.C.Q.

Me Gabriel Gaudreault Cain Lamarre Casgrain Wells Lawyers for the applicant Me Sarah Plamondon Lawyer for the child Me Michel Solomon Lawyer for the mother

Date of hearing: November 27, 2012