2017 QCCQ 14445, 2017 QCCQ 14445

Protection de la jeunesse — 176223 2017 QCCQ 14445 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 145-41-000544-178 DATE: June 7, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant -and- X born on [...], 2000 Child -and- A Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 declare that the security and development of the adolescent is in danger according to

section 38

f) of the Youth protection Act , because she would have behavioural problems. [ 2 ] The mother is not present during the hearing, even though she was duly served on April 3, 2017. [ 3 ] The adolescent is present and duly represented. Even if she denies, as written or ignores some allegations, through her counsel, she agrees with the recommendations suggested by the DYP. Also she consents to the filing of the report to value as testimony of its author.

No further evidence was presented in regards to the adolescent’s situation in relation with the allegations denied by her. [ 4 ] The DYP had to intervene in this family in regards to an event which took place in the household. The police was called because the adolescent assaulted her sister with a frying pan.

At their arrival, they noticed she was highly intoxicated and extremely violent. [ 5 ] On March 17, 2017, following this episode, an emergency measure was applied and the adolescent was entrusted to a rehabilitation unit. [ 6 ] On March 23, 2017, a provisionary measure was ordered entrusting the child to a rehabilitation unit until May 3, 2017. The measure was extended until the present inquiry. [ 7 ] It is not the first time that the adolescent had to spend time in a rehabilitation unit.

In fact, when she was twelve years old, she went one month, but on a voluntary basis. [ 8 ] During the year of 2014, her biological father had a few contacts and some vacation time with her but, it only lasted one year and it stopped. The mother feels that is the reason why her daughter began to demonstrate behavioural problems. However, the issues with the adolescent seemed to have arisen within the past year. [ 9 ] The proof reveals that the adolescent consumes alcohol every day. She is out of control. Furthermore, she refuses to attend school and defies her mother.

She is short-tempered and is easily frustrated. [ 10 ] Since her arrival at the unit, she struggles with anger management issues and does not recognize any responsibilities for her actions. She expresses her emotions by making physical gestures against objects, herself or to others. She is proud of her violent conduct and does not show any remorse for it.

[ 11 ] Currently, she is waiting to attend court in the province of Quebec and New Brunswick for the criminal charges brought against her. [ 12 ] Despites her use of violence to express her emotions or feelings, the adolescent has the ability to follow direction and to follow the unit’s rules. [ 13 ] About the mother, through the years, she obtained services in order to build a relationship between herself and her daughter. [ 14 ] Concerning drug use, she had an addiction in regards of Percocet but she has ceased all consumption of drugs a year ago.

She admits drinking alcohol but admits it’s under control. [ 15 ] The mother is concerned by her daughter’s situation and fears that she could harm herself. She collaborates well with DYP and she is open to work with any professional services available. She wants help, guidance and support from them. [ 16 ] The Youth protection delegates summarize in the psychosocial report [1] dated April 18, 2017, the situation of the adolescent as follows: « It is evident that X’s encounters with alcohol and violence are escalating, causing bodily harm to others.

Her conflicts with the law and her behaviors are putting her at greater risks for her safety and security of development. ” [ 17 ] The evidence demonstrates that the security and development of the adolescent are 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. [ 18 ] FOR THESE REASONS AND THOSE EXPRESSED ORALLY AT THE HEARING, THE COURT: [ 19 ] GRANTS the application for protection; [ 20 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are in danger according to

section 38

f) of the Youth protection act ; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to a Rehabilitation Center for a period of six (6) months until November 30, 2017; [ 22 ] RECOMMENDS that the adolescent and her mother benefit from psychological counselling to deal with their personal issues; [ 23 ] RECOMMENDS that the adolescent participate with an addictions assessment drug/alcohol counselling as long as deemed necessary; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and her mother benefit from external educator services; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and her mother participate in the application of the measures ordered; [ 26 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and her family until November 30, 2017; [ 27 ] 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 order. __________________________________ CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q.

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