2011 QCCQ 7591, 2011 QCCQ 7591

Protection de la jeunesse — 111979 2011 QCCQ 7591 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] “Youth Division” DATE: May 18, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: N°: 615-41-001068-070 X 1996-[…] MS. [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection Worker, exercising her profession at the Centre Jeunesse a, having a place of business at […] in town A, district A, […] Petitioner And MRS.

A, residing and domiciled at […] in town B, district A, […] Mother And MR. B, residing and domiciled at […] in town C, Quebec, district A, […] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JL2340 JUDGMENT (Section 95 (1 and 2) Y.P.A. , chap. P-34.1 R.S.Q. ) [ 1 ] Ms. [social worker 1], delegate to the Director of Youth Protection A, is asking the Court to review the last decision rendered on July 9, 2009 concerning the situation of X, 15 years old.

For different motives, she is asking for a six-month placement in a rehabilitation centre and a further foster family placement until majority. [ 2 ] At the hearing, both parents are absent, even if duly served. The youth is present, assisted by Me Angela Tommasel.

Me Valérie Martel represents the applicant. [ 3 ] The evidence on the new facts in support of the recommendations is based on the admissions of the youth, school and educators’ reports, a revision report and also on the testimonies of Ms. [social worker 2], Social Worker, the youth and her sisters. [ 4 ] From the analysis of all the evidence, it is proven that the youth displays behavioural problems for which she needs specialized re-education services. [ 5 ] In fact, the youth consumes drugs and alcohol and does not comply with the rules at either the foster family or the school.

On February 2, she was suspended from school because of her many absences. [ 6 ] On February 10, she missed school for the whole afternoon and came back to the foster family at 9:00 p.m. [ 7 ] On February 22, she ran away and showed up at her sister's apartment on February 23. Then she became very aggressive,

thinking her sister had reported her to the police. She hit her sister and turned the apartment upside down. [ 8 ] X has been kept at the reception center ever since. [ 9 ] The youth’s mother has maintained occasional contacts and the father regularly contacts her. Both parents only have occasional communication with the applicant. [ 10 ] The youth would like to live in the family of Ms. [social worker 2], where her sister Y was entrusted years ago. [ 11 ] Ms. [social worker 2] would like to foster X once her behavioural problems have disappeared.

Ms. [social worker 2] offers good collaboration with the Social Worker in the situation of Y and she is able to structure the youth. She has good communication with X and would like to give her the chance to live close to her sister and family. [ 12 ] The youth's sisters are well aware of X’s drugs problems and negative influence of her friends. Her sisters acknowledge that X's misbehaviour jeopardise her future. They are aware of her good school abilities and they would like her to obtain a diploma as they are doing.

The sisters are able to provide her good counselling, replacing at the moment the parental guidance X missed. [ 13 ] Having heard the evidence, the youth finally acknowledges her difficulties and accepts a placement in a reception centre but with the possibility of an earlier progressive reintegration at Ms. [social worker 2]'s home if her situation allows. She also agrees to be assessed by a psychologist and to receive regular follow-up if needed.

Concerning her drug problems, she agrees to be assessed and to be followed-up thereafter. [ 14 ] Considering the type of the behavioural problems proved, the consent of X to collaborate and to be assessed for drug abuse and her psychological condition, the Court orders her placement in a reception centre for six months with a recommendation that she might start progressive reintegration at Ms. [social worker 2]'s home after a three-month placement, if she maintains good collaboration. [ 15 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS the petition; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still in danger; [ 18 ] ORDERS the placement of X in a reception center for a period of six months; [ 19 ] RECOMMENDS a progressive reintegration of the youth at Ms. [social worker 2]'s home after a three-month placement in a reception centre; [ 20 ] ENTRUSTS X to Ms. [social worker 2] until majority; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the youth be assessed for drug abuse and be followed-up if needed; [ 22 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to proceed to a psychological assessment of the youth and to provide her with a regular follow-up if needed; [ 23 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to supervise the visit and access rights of the parents to the youth; [ 24 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the youth and her parents until she reaches majority; [ 25 ] ORDERS any police officer to collaborate in the execution of the present enactment; [ 26 ] ENTRUSTS the youth’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing this enactment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Me Valérie Martel, attorney for the petitioner Me Angela Tommasel, attorney for the youth Date of hearing: March 24, 2011