2017 QCCQ 14443, 2017 QCCQ 14443

Protection de la jeunesse — 176221 2017 QCCQ 14443 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 145-41-000528-163 DATE: June 7, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant -and- X born on [...], 2000 Adolescent -and- A Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ JA1013 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 (DYP) asks the Court to revise and extend the order rendered on January 6, 2017 in respect of the child. His sister is aimed by the same application. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the mother is present but not represented by a lawyer. She agrees with the facts of the application and also with the measures proposed by the DYP. [ 3 ] The adolescent is also present and duly represented.

Through his counsel he admits generally the facts and he agrees with the recommendations suggested by the DYP. [ 4 ] He asks the court that a paragraph by added in the conclusions to recommend that the adolescent pursue his psychological counselling and to change the date of the end of the measure to [...], 2018, instead of June 30, 2018, because he will reach his majority on April 2018.

All parties agree with those modifications into the conclusions. [ 5 ] In regards of the filing of the report to value as testimony of its author, both parties agree to it. [ 6 ] Since the last court order rendered on January 6, 2017, the situation has evolved. The adolescent adapted very well in his foster environment. He is doing well in school. He searches for help when needed. [ 7 ] In fact on April 2017 he was facing several issues such as depression, suicidal thoughts, self-mutilation and alcohol use.

He was able to ask for professional services to help him deal with it. [ 8 ] The adolescent is seventeen years old. He is not as vulnerable as before, within a few months he will become an adult. He needs to learn to take care of himself for the future. Furthermore, he wishes to spend more time with his mother. [ 9 ] On the mother’s side, improvements were also noticed. All through her follow-up, she became more involved with DYP and collaborates well. It was observed that she is very forthcoming with honesty and expresses her feelings.

She is stable emotionally and she is doing well for the past months. [ 10 ] On February 22, 2017, she successfully graduated from a residential addiction treatment program of Mawiomi that she attended for a six-week period. Currently, she goes to AA meetings and pursues her follow-up with her psychiatrist. However, she admits having a

relapse by consuming marihuana on May 2017. She is more than willing to take random drug tests. It shows her transparency and honesty with the DYP. [ 11 ] She has regular contacts with her children through visitation and phone calls. She is concerned with their emotional well-being. She wants professional support services in order to help them. [ 12 ] Regarding the father’s biological, his involvement is not consistent. From the period of March 24, 2017, to May 8, 2017, no contact whatsoever occur between them.

The adolescent shares that he does not want a relationship with him. [ 13 ] The Youth Protection delegates mention the following in the psychosocial report [1] dated May 17, 2017, for which this Court could not agree more: “Mental Health issues can create challenges and it is known there will be tribulations, however; with professional support services and external education along with Ms.

A’s willingness to want a healthy lifestyle, together with her family they can achieve success.” [ 14 ] Considering all the progress made by both the adolescent and the mother, it is now favourable for the adolescent to reintegrate his maternal home but with the support required. It is clear in the Court’s mind that the mother did prioritize the needs of her family and committed to it. However, the family still require help, support and guidance.

Everyone wants to be involved in the process and have services in order to put an end of the situation of compromission. [ 15 ] The evidence demonstrates that the security and development of the adolescent are still in danger. Under the circumstances and considering the admission and consent of the parties, the application is well founded. The suggested measures appear to be in the best interest of the adolescent.

FOR THESE REASONS AND THOSE EXPRESSED ORALLY AT THE HEARING, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS the application for revision and extension of order; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still considered to be in danger according to

section 38 of the youth protection act ; [ 18 ] REVISES AND EXTENDS the Court order rendered on January 6, 2017, in the present file; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to his mother; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and his mother benefit from the services of an external educator; [ 21 ] RECOMMENDS that the adolescent pursue his psychological counselling; [ 22 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother participate in an addiction assessment, treatment, counselling and follow-up; [ 23 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother actively participate in a personal and parental psychological assessment; [ 24 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and his family until [...], 2018; [ 25 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent to the DYP of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A for the carrying out of the present judgment. __________________________________ CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q.

Me Louyse A. Lemieux for the applicant Me Alexis Deschênes for the child Mrs. A the mother Date of hearing: June 7, 2017 Written judgment filed on June 22, 2017