2022 QCCQ 8617, 2022 QCCQ 8617

Protection de la jeunesse — 225809 2022 QCCQ 8617 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-037435-203 Date: August 30, 2022 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on [...], 2008 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A Applicant -and- A , the mother -and- B , the father (deceased) The parents JUDGMENT Sections 95 and 95.1 of the Youth Protection Act (L.R.Q., C.

P-34.1 ) 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 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Court hereby confirms and provides written reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of August 30, 2022, in accordance with

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act [1] . [ 2 ] The Court was presented with an Application for revision of an order rendered by the honourable Ruth Veillet on December 10, 2020, whereby the now fourteen year-old adolescent, X , was entrusted to her mother with aid, counsel and assistance, for a period of nine months. [ 3 ] The facts alleged in support of the Application for revision and for provisional compulsory foster care dated May 18, 2021, are as follows: 3.1. the child remained in a foster home; 3.2. shortly after the placement, the child began not respecting the foster home rules, not participating in chores and being disrespectful; 3.3. on May 11, 2021, the child expressed suicidal ideations with a clear plan to self harm; 3.4. on that date, the child was brought to the Montreal Children’s Hospital where she was discharged the following day; 3.5. on May 13, 2021, the child self harmed in the bathroom using staples on her arms approximately ten (10) to fifteen (15) times; 3.6. on May 14, 2021, the child voiced having dark thoughts with a clear plan to cut her throat; 3.7. on that date, the child was brought to the Montreal Children’s Hospital where she was assessed and later discharged; 3.8. the child spent the weekend with the mother; 3.9. the foster mother states that she is no longer in a position to ensure the child’s safety; 3.10. on May 17, 2021, immediate protective measures were invoked and the child was placed in a rehabilitation center; 3.11. the child requires, at this point in time, the structure and supervision of a rehabilitation center (reproduced with errors and/or omissions).

[ 4 ] On May 19, 2021, the Application for provisional compulsory foster care was dismissed by the undersigned for the following reasons: Considering that the evidence establishes that the level of psychological distress has increased since the adolescent’s placement; Considering that there is a loving relationship between mother and daughter; Considering that the adolescent is in need of services, not placement; Considering that the psychiatrist who assessed the adolescent at the hospital concluded that there was no risk associated with the family environment; Considering that the mother is more than willing to collaborate having realized the extent of the adolescent’s distress; Considering that with adequate support a reasonable safety net is achievable, under certain conditions to ensure the adolescent’s safety; [2] [ 5 ] The adolescent was therefore entrusted to her mother under certain conditions, including the obligation to attend school on a daily basis. [ 6 ] The hearing on the merits began on June 11, 2021. [ 7 ] The Director then recommended that the adolescent remain entrusted to her mother and interim measures were agreed upon by all parties. [ 8 ] The hearing was continued on October 18, 2021.

However, the hearing could not be completed and provisional measures were extended for the following reasons: Considering the fact that the psychological assessment has not been completed, due in part to the family’s delay in completing and submitting the necessary documentation; Considering that the mother has chosen to homeschool her daughter but that she is only on leave from her work until October, and that it is not known what the situation will be as of November regarding her employment and regarding measures to ensure that her daughter’s needs will be met should she need to return to work; Considering that both the mother and the daughter have not yet been vaccinated and that it is not clear what activities may be put in place to ensure that the adolescent can interact with her peers and participate in structured social and physical activities necessary to her well- being; [3] [ 9 ] The hearing was continued on February 1, 2022 and the Director announced its intention to discontinue the proceedings and close the file. [ 10 ] The Court raised a number of concerns, more particularly: Given the Court’s questions regarding the child’s opportunities to socialize; Given the Court’s questions regarding the child’s alleged registration for the 2022-2023 school year; Given the Director’s position that the Court only has jurisdiction to take judicial notice of the discontinuance of the proceedings; Given that the Court would like detailed arguments from counsel for the Director of Youth Protection; Given that the Court would like either written or verbal arguments and that counsel prefers to make written arguments and suggests a delay until February 25, 2022; [4] Counsel for the Director of Youth Protection was granted the requested delay to produce written arguments. [ 11 ] However, as explained in the Addendum dated February 9, 2022, the Director revised its position and no longer sought to discontinue the proceedings: Leading up to the hearing on February 1 st , 2022, the DYP had recommended closure in this file.

During the court hearing certain concerns were raised, namely the inability of X to participate in organized activities with peers (which had been previously mentioned as an ongoing issue in the last report) as well as the reliability of X’s mother in ensuring that X be registered and attend high school next year. Throughout the past months, X and her mother have explained to the undersigned that their plan was to register X to School A.

However, during the court hearing on February 1 st , 2022 it became evident that X had not yet been registered, and X’s mother had not taken the necessary steps to inform herself with regards to registration dates and deadlines. [5] […] Given the recent developments and subsequent concerns surrounding X’s school registration, and the ongoing difficulty with regards to Ms. A [the mother] transparency regarding this issue, it is the opinion of the DYP that new measures must be implemented to ensure the above mentioned concerns are resolved. [6]

[ 12 ] The hearing was continued on May 20, 2022.

Despite the lengthy delay since the filing of the Application, the Court concluded it would be premature to order final measures: Considering that the adolescent’s psychological assessment strongly suggested that she attend school in person to increase her social interaction with peers and practice her social skills (Exhibit D-8, page 1); Considering that her registration has still not been completed despite repeated undertakings and assurances by the mother who has failed to follow-through on her commitments to register the child to attend school; Considering that it is urgent to ensure her registration is completed as soon as possible to guarantee her attendance at the beginning of the next academic year; Considering that the adolescent wants to receive therapy and that is urgent that she do so; [7] [ 13 ] The hearing was finally completed on August 30, 2022. [ 14 ] The Director then recommended that the adolescent remain entrusted to her mother, with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, for a period of six months. [ 15 ] The mother, who chose to proceed without the assistance of legal counsel, admitted most of the alleged facts but argued that the Director’s involvement is no longer required and that the file should be closed. [ 16 ] The adolescent’s father is deceased. [ 17 ] The adolescent, assisted by Me Ouellette, also admitted most of the allegations and claimed that the file should be closed. [ 18 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-5 to D-11 as evidence: D-5: 95 Court Report, signed by [Social Worker 1], dated June 4, 2021; D-6: Copy of child’s school absenteeism Report from December 22, 2020 to April 20, 2021; D-7: Addendum I, signed by [Social Worker 1], dated September 22, 2021; D-8: Addendum II, signed by [Social Worker 1], dated January 10, 2022; D-9: Addendum III, signed by [Social Worker 1], dated February 9, 2022; D-10: Addendum IV, signed by [Social Worker 1], dated May 17, 2022; D-11: Addendum V, signed by [Social Worker 1], dated August 4, 2022. [ 19 ] In

summary, the adolescent’s difficulties and prolonged absence from school are admitted, as are the mother’s challenges in meeting her daughter’s needs. [ 20 ] However, both mother and daughter claim to have benefitted significantly from the Director of Youth Protection’s involvement. The mother states that she has a better understanding of her daughter’s needs and that their relationship is much stronger.

She now feels able to support her daughter without the Director of Youth Protection’s ongoing involvement. [ 21 ] The adolescent is finally registered to attend school, and is looking forward to a fresh start in a new environment, away from the bullying she experienced at her former school. The adolescent is also scheduled to receive individual counselling services.

As a result, both mother and daughter argue that the adolescent’s security and development are no longer endangered and that the file should be closed. [ 22 ] The evidence does show significant progress, more particularly regarding the adolescent’s mental health since she began receiving services: X has been receiving therapy at the CLSC with Dr. Jonathan Gagnon. […] In accordance with Dr.

Gagnon’s recommendations, X’s file is in the process of being transferred to a more specialized service offered at the Douglas Hospital (Clinique troubles alimentaires). […] It is clear that X’s overall mental health has greatly ameliorated over the last period. [8] [ 23 ] However, there have been delays in identifying the resources to best meet her needs: On April 7 th , 2022, the undersigned was informed that X was being transferred back to CLSC by Douglas Hospital.

X informed the undersigned that the reason was that Douglas Hospital could not treat her specific eating disorder. [9] [ 24 ] Once referred back to the CLSC, there were additional delays due to difficulties communicating with the mother: Regarding X’s therapy, in May and early June 2022, Ms. A noted that she had not reached out to anyone due to feeling sick, and mentioned that she had not heard from anyone from the CLSC. The undersigned called the CLSC to inquire about X’s file and to obtain an update. The undersigned spoke to Ms. Raiza Pacheco and Ms. Quingyan Wu at the CLSC.

The undersigned was informed by the CLSC workers that they had tried to contact X’s mother, but they had not been able to reach Ms. A. [10]

[ 25 ] As a result, many months have passed and the adolescent is still waiting for services. [ 26 ] In addition, the mother repeatedly reassured the workers and the Court that she would take the necessary steps to register her daughter to attend school yet failed to do so. [ 27 ] In fact, the adolescent’s psychological assessment emphasizes the importance of in-class learning for the adolescent: The assessment also concluded that it is highly recommended that X attend school in person to increase her social interaction with peers and practice her social skills. [11] [ 28 ] Yet: […] during the court hearing on February 1 st , 2022 it became evident that X had not yet been registered, and X’s mother had not taken the necessary steps to inform herself with regards to registration dates and deadlines. [12] [ 29 ] As mentioned earlier, several months later, in May 2022, the adolescent’s registration for the upcoming academic year had still not been completed. [ 30 ] Under the circumstances, given the severity of the adolescent’s psychological, social and emotional struggles, given her prolonged absence from school, given the need for her to socialize with peers for her mental health, given the mother’s lack of transparency and numerous delays in ensuring the adolescent’s school registration, and given the delays to ensure that the adolescent continue to receive therapeutic services, the Court concludes that the adolescent’s security and development remain endangered and that ongoing Director of Youth Protection’s intervention remains necessary to ensure that the adolescent attends school in person and receives the counselling services she needs. [ 31 ] Under the circumstances, the evidence establishes that the application is well-founded and that the recommendations are in the adolescent’s interest.

THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 32 ] GRANTS the application; [ 33 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the adolescent, X , remain in danger under the Youth Protection Act ; AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE ADOLESCENT 'S INTEREST TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 34 ] ORDERS that the adolescent remain entrusted to the care of her mother; [ 35 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the adolescent attends school in person on a daily basis, unless excused by a medical note; [ 36 ] ORDERS that the mother and the adolescent follow through with the recommendations in the adolescent’s Psychological Assessment dated July 10, 2021; [ 37 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the adolescent receives all support services required to address her needs, TAKING JUDICAL NOTICE that the adolescent’s file is in the process of being transferred to the CLSC and that the adolescent intends on following through with the services; [ 38 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the mother and daughter participate in family therapy; [ 39 ] ORDERS that the mother collaborate with treating professionals, including the Director of Youth Protection as well as school professionals, and that she follow through with the recommendations made; [ 40 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to share and obtain pertinent information with all treating professionals working with the family, including school officials; [ 41 ] ORDERS that a person working for the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and her family; [ 42 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent, X , to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A , who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 43 ] THE WHOLE for a period of six months.

Signed on September 22, 2022 TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. Me Hanane Loumi Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Paule Ouellette Attorney for the adolescent Hearing dates: June 11, October 18, 2022, February 1, May 20 and August 30, 2022. TD/vl