2018 QCCQ 13769, 2018 QCCQ 13769

Protection de la jeunesse — 184174 2018 QCCQ 13769 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] LOCALITY OF […] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-0 33890-187 Date: June 28, 2018 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on [...], 2009 [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

Section 38 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 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] JD2620 The Court hereby confirms and provides written reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of June 28, 2018, in accordance with the provisions of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act [1] . [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A filed an Application to declare that the security or development of a child is in danger in the case of X , an eight year-old child, based on the serious risk of neglect and the psychological ill-treatment to which he is exposed. [ 3 ] The facts alleged in support of the application dated April 30, 2018 are as follows: 3.1. as relevant background information, in or around May 2017, the father committed suicide; 3.2. the father had an extensive criminal history, and spent periods of time in jail; 3.3. the father had been emotionally manipulative and abusive towards the mother; 3.4. the mother has a history of being involved in relationship involving conjugal violence; 3.5. prior to May 2017, the mother was living with a man named “C” who had been physically, verbally and mentally abusive towards her on a regular basis; 3.6. the child was regularly exposed to the said violence and abuse towards the mother; 3.7. in May 2017, the mother and C ended their relationship; 3.8. the mother has a history of depression, and had two attempts of suicide in the past; 3.9. the mother presently takes medication for depression, anxiety, and issues with sleeping; 3.10. the mother has been diagnosed as having a borderline personality;

3.11. the mother has been neglectful towards the child insofar as his schooling needs; 3.12. the school reports that the mother is very difficult to reach, and does not follow through with issues reported; 3.13. the mother has not been consistent in terms of the child’s medical follow up; 3.14. the mother has been experiencing financial hardships, which have made her overwhelmed in caring for the child; 3.15. during periods of difficulties, the mother was dependent upon the paternal grandparents to take care of the child; 3.16. in or around June 2017, the mother left the child in the care of the paternal grandparents, as she needed the time for herself in order to deal with her financial issues; 3.17. the child remained in the paternal grandparents’ care until around August 2017, when he moved to reside with the paternal aunt and uncle; 3.18. since that time, the child has remained in the care of the paternal aunt and uncle where his needs are being appropriately cared for; 3.19. nonetheless, the paternal aunt and uncle are finding it stressful and difficult to care for the child, and can only commit to caring for him until the end of the academic year; 3.20. the mother has not followed through in remedying her own personal situation; 3.21. the mother has only sporadic contacts with the child, and has seen him approximately six times since August 2017; 3.22. the mother is not in a position to have the child returned to her care, at this time (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 4 ] In light of the foregoing, and given positive developments since the date of the application, the Director recommends that the child be entrusted to the care of his mother, with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, for a period of twelve months. [ 5 ] The mother, assisted by Me Sabik, admitted most of the facts alleged in support of the application.

She expressed her consent to all the proposed measures. [ 6 ] The child's father is deceased. [ 7 ] Me Legault, on behalf of the child, made no admissions but approved of the measures proposed by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 8 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-1 to D-6 as evidence: D-1: Copy of the child’s birth certificate; D-2: Copy of the father’s death certificate; D-3: Excerpts of the mother’s medical file from St. Mary’s Hospital Center (filed under

Article 293 C.p.c.); D-4: Provisional Agreement signed on February 26, 2018; D-5: Court Report, prepared by [Social Worker 1], dated June 20, 2018; D-6: Elementary School Report Card for School year 2017-2018. [ 9 ] In

summary, the mother acknowledges that the Director of Youth Protection’s involvement remains necessary for the reasons alleged and expressed her appreciation of the Director of Youth Protection’s support. She is strongly encouraged to continue with her efforts to provide her son with a stable, secure environment, unlike the chaotic lifestyle he has been exposed to: The A-B family came to the attention of the Department of Youth Protection for concerns of neglect, risk of neglect, and psychological maltreatment.

The evaluation substantiated the reported concerns with regards to X living a transient lifestyle over the past two years, not seeing a dentist, and having significant learning and academic needs that were not met. He had problems with his eyes as well which was never addressed until such time that he begun living with his paternal aunt and uncle. Since starting to live with his aunt and uncle. X now has a routine, structure, is able to follow rules and expectations, as well as doing much better at school. According to X he was victim and witnesses significant conjugal violence between his mother and her partner.

He has lived instability, has been to 4 different schools in 8 years, and is fully aware of what goes on in his life. He expressed anger towards his mother, his living situation, and the fact that his mother has not been able to provide him with a “normal” life [2] (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 10 ] The mother has established that she is capable of making changes and is willing to learn: She has been forthcoming with this caseworker and has demonstrated insight into the concerns of the DYP.

In a short amount of time, she demonstrated that she has the capacity to mobilize herself and make appropriate adjustments in her day to day routine in order to provide for her child. During a supervised visit, this caseworker observed Ms. A to be supportive, attentive and encouraging towards X. […] Ms. A is open to receiving and is engaging in services to address her personal issues. Ms. A has been collaborative and is receptive to the

recommendations of the DYP. [3] [ 11 ] She has also taken concrete steps to ensure that her child’s needs are met: Ms. A has begun the process of re-organizing her apartment in order to better accommodate X. Ms. A has demonstrated an active involvement is X’s academic, social and health development. She enrolled him into A Elementary School for the fall, arranged for X to attend camp this summer and has scheduled doctor appointments with his paediatrician and ophthalmologist. Moreover, she is planning on structuring her work

schedule differently in order to adequately provide supervision for X rather than relying on family members. [4] [ 12 ] Finally, she shares the Director of Youth Protection’s conclusion to the effect that ongoing support remains necessary. [ 13 ] Consequently, given the admissions and consent expressed by each of the parties, the Court is satisfied that the application is well-founded and that the measures are in the child's interest. THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 14 ] GRANTS the application; [ 15 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child, X , are in danger under sections 38 (b) (2) and 38 (

c) of the Youth Protection Act ; AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE CHILD'S INTEREST TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 16 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to the care of his mother; [ 17 ] ORDERS that the mother collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection; [ 18 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother benefit from community services such as the CLSC and the A Clinic and follow through with any recommendations; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the child is not exposed to any form of domestic violence; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the child receive all health care services required, including dental and pediatric follow-up; [ 21 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother ensure that the child is provided with psychosocial follow-up and intervention; [ 22 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother work with an educator or participate in a parent education program; [ 23 ] AUTHORIZES the delegate to share and obtain relevant information from the professionals involved with the family regarding participation and attendance; [ 24 ] ORDERS that a person working for the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and his family; [ 25 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, 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; [ 26 ] THE WHOLE for a period of twelve months.

Signed on July 10, 2018 TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. Me Dominique Douglas Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Edith Legault Attorney for the child Me Nadia Sabik Attorney for the mother

TD/vl