2010 QCCQ 15834, 2010 QCCQ 15834

Protection de la jeunesse — 103204 2010 QCCQ 15834 CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC [...] JJ0296 COURT OF QUEBEC YOUTH DIVISION N° : 525-41-022841-092 DATE : November 24, 2010 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE ANN-MARIE JONES, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ In the case of : X Born on […], 1995 ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGEMENT

Section 95 Y.P.A. ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of November 24, 2010, in accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the law. [ 2 ] The Court was presented with a motion for extension of an order rendered January 12, 2010, ordering that the adolescent be entrusted to a rehabilitation centre until September 30, 2010, with gradual reintegration to her mother’s care as of June 10, 2010, if the situation allowed.

Furthermore, that a social follow-up be provided to the family until December 1 st , 2010. [ 3 ] The principal facts alleged in support of the Director’s motion are the following: • The adolescent responded very well to the structure of the rehabilitation centre where she made significant progress; • The adolescent participated in substance abuse counselling, in therapy and in the leave-out violence program; • The adolescent was reintegrated to the full-time care of her mother on September 30, 2010; • Thus far, the adolescent’s behaviour has remained stable, but there have been some difficulties at school, an educator has been assigned to work with the family on these issues; • The mother continues to struggle with depression for which she receives medical follow-up; however she requires intensive supports to manage the adolescent’s behaviour, which can be challenging at times; • The adolescent visits her father every other weekend and those contacts are positive. [ 4 ] The Director of Youth Protection recommends that the adolescent be entrusted to her mother’s care and that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the family for a period of six months. [ 5 ] The father is not present at the hearing although the motion was served to him personally.

The father informed the youth worker that he agreed with the recommended measures. Under the circumstances, and with the consent of the other parties, the Court proceeded in the absence of the father. [ 6 ] The mother admits the facts alleged in the motion and agrees with the recommended measures. The mother states that her daughter has made progress, but that her behaviour can be oppositional. She presented a letter from the A Program worker that says that she is successful in adapting her approaches and responses to her daughter.

The mother says that the adolescent has been attending school on a regular basis, but is having some difficulties in math. [ 7 ] The adolescent agrees with the recommended measures. She was seen at the A Hospital and diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder (ODD). As for visits with her father, the adolescent says that she wants to be allowed to see him when she wishes.

[ 8 ] The Court also heard the testimony of Ms. [social worker 1], youth worker, and read the report the Director filed as proof of the adolescent’s situation. The evidence reveals that the adolescent has made progress, but that the services of the A Program are still necessary. Furthermore, certain issues need to be discussed concerning the contacts between the adolescent and her father. [ 9 ] Under the circumstances, it is in the adolescent’s best interest to be entrusted to her mother’s care with a social follow-up for period of six months.

The evidence and the admissions made have convinced the Court that the security and development of the adolescent are still compromised. [ 10 ] THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 11 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 12 ] DECLARES still compromised the security and development of the adolescent, X; [ 13 ] ORDERS that the adolescent, X, be entrusted to the care of her mother; [ 14 ] ORDERS that the adolescent attend school on a daily basis; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the family participate with the A program for as long as deemed necessary; [ 16 ] ORDERS that the adolescent receive all health care services required by her situation and more particularly, ORDERS the neuropsychiatric and neurological evaluation of the adolescent as recommended by the psychiatric evaluation; [ 17 ] ORDERS DYP to contact the nurse of the A Hospital to receive information concerning the adolescent's diagnosis of ODD; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the adolescent and her father be determined by the Director of Youth Protection as to frequency and modality; [ 19 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that a meeting will take place between DYP, the father, the adolescent and the mother concerning the visits with the father; [ 20 ] ORDERS DYP to stay in contact with the school authorities to monitor the adolescent's behaviour and progress; [ 21 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the adolescent and her family for a period of six months; [ 22 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent, X, to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall see that the measures are carried out; [ 23 ] ORDERS the execution of the present order by any peace officer.

AMJ/dg Signed on December 22, 2010 Ann-Marie Jones, J.C.Q. Me Myriam DeBlois (Counsel for the D.Y.P.) Me Dominique Trahan (Counsel for the adolescent) Date of hearing : November 24, 2010