2016 QCCQ 5469, 2016 QCCQ 5469

Protection de la jeunesse — 161032 2016 QCCQ 5469 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 115-41-000074-161 DATE: March 4, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE ROBERT LEVESQUE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Petitioner -and- X Adolescent -and- A -and- B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] A petition for protection purpose in respect of X (1999-[...]) is referred to the Court by the Director of youth protection pursuant to

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The petition is based on the following assertions and facts:

a) The parents are separated since 2005 and there is no Superior Court order regarding custody of X;

b) For years, X kept moving back and forth between her mom and dad, depending on disputes she had with one of them;

c) At the end of summer 2015, X was no longer talking to her mother while living with her father;

d) Since September 2015, X lives with her mother and cuts contacts with her father;

e) When X is residing with one parent, she cuts contacts with the non-guardian parent;

f) When that happens, the non-guardian parent does not preserve its relation with X and also cuts the contacts;

g) The parents have received services from the CLSC in the past but the father never got really involved;

h) X has received services from a psychologist and a psychiatrist in 2013, following suicidal thoughts and automutilation;

i) The mother has difficulties with establishing limits, and being constant in her authority;

j) X feels rejected by her father who does not make efforts to get closer to her;

k) The conflict between the parents is still very serious : ➢ They blame each other for the situation;

➢ They denigrate each other in front of X;

l) X’s health is fragile : ➢ She has trouble sleeping; ➢ She is not feeding herself properly; ➢ She is tired; ➢ She lost weight; ➢ Her mental health is fragile; ➢ She occasionnally consumes pot and alcohol along with medication; ➢ She has suicidal flashes;

m) X started back her psychological and psychiatric follow up in October 2015;

n) The mother is cooperative with the services;

o) The father blames the mother for X’s situation;

p) X is fragile and needs stability, structure and support. [ 3 ] At the hearing, the adolescent is absent but is represented by a lawyer who explains that the hearing is too stressful for her to be present. The parents are present and unrepresented. [ 4 ] From the outset, the petitioner’s attorney proposes a modification to the conclusions of the petition.

Indeed, she asks that the adolescent be entrusted to her mother as mentioned in the Superior Court’s judgment of January 28, 2016. [ 5 ] The Court examined a letter from the school’s director, the reports of a psycho educator and of a social worker regarding the mother’s follow up, the report of a psychologist concerning X, the petitioner’s psychosocial report and a judgment of the Superior Court. [ 6 ] The Court heard the parents. They admit, generally speaking, the allegations of the petition. [ 7 ] The father denies certain allegations as written.

He says that he tried to maintain contact with his daughter but she did not respect him, using inappropriate language. He denies not being involved as he often brought his daughter to different appointments. He denies putting all the blame on the mother and accepts equally his part of responsibility. He is very concerned for his daughter and wants the very best for her. [ 8 ] He claims that his daughter’s problems originate in the parent’s separation. Also, there are depression problems in both extended family and taking alcohol and drugs with medication is certainly not helping.

He recognizes the importance of the medication for X. [ 9 ] The mother says that she takes her part of responsibility but not all of it. She denies having cut the contacts with X but did respect X’s decision. She claims that the communication between the parents is difficult. She insists that she never prevented X to have contacts with her father. It was X’s decision. [ 10 ] For the time present, X is educated at home on an adult program and she is doing well. [ 11 ] The adolescent’s lawyer declares that X admits most of the allegations of the petition.

She denies having cut all contacts with the non-guardian parent but says she tried to maintain a minimum of contacts. She also claims that there is a significant improvement since last fall regarding her attitude towards her mother’s authority. She did not drink alcohol since November and her pot consumption has diminished. She recognizes her need for help. She understands that she is entrusted to her mother for the moment and do not want to be forced to resume speedy contacts with her father.

She is ready to work on this with the psychologist and the social worker. [ 12 ] Considering the report’s content, the testimonies as well as the position of the parties, the Court grants the petition according to its conclusions. [ 13 ] From what was said at the hearing, the Court is convinced that the parents will do their very best to understand their daughter’s needs and to make sure to not disturb her with their conflict. [ 14 ] It is important that the father/adolescent link be improved and that the contacts be determined following an agreement between the adolescent, her parents and the Director of youth protection. [ 15 ] X must understand the importance to be constant and participative with the different follow-up and to take her medication.

She must also keep in mind that her parents love and care for her and that they agree to invest themselves in the recovery of the situation.

WHEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 16 ] DECLARES that the security and development of XX are considered to be in danger according to

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 17 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to her mother; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the adolescent participate and follow the recommendations of the different professionals, as long as indicated by the professional; [ 19 ] AUTHORIZES the professionals involved with the adolescent and the parents follow up to exchange information; [ 20 ] ORDERS the parents to not involve their daughter in their conflict; [ 21 ] ORDERS the parents to participate in all the measures proposed by the Director of youth protection to put an end to the situation of endangerment; [ 22 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and her parents until January 31, 2017; [ 23 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent to the Director of youth protection of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A for the carrying out of the present judgment. __________________________________ ROBERT LEVESQUE, J.C.Q.

Me Mélissa Plourde, for the petitioner Me Sébastien Caron, for the adolescent Mrs. A, the mother Mr. B, the father