2022 QCCQ 12094, 2022 QCCQ 12094

Protection de la jeunesse — 227133 2022 QCCQ 12094 COUR DU QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] «Youth Division» N° : 505-41-010925-222 DATE : October 21, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDED BY: JUSTICE MÉLANIE ROY ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1] youth protection worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A , Applicant -and- X , born on [...], 2011 Child -and- A Mother J U D G E M E N T

Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act 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 9.2 and 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A .) [ 1 ] The child is eleven years old. She lives with her mother.

The father is unknown. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection (the Director) presents an application for protection under the Youth Protection Act . [ 3 ] She alleges essentially that the security and development of the child are in danger due to educational neglect She recommends that the child be entrusted to foster care family with a social follow-up until June 28, 2023; [ 4 ] The mother disagrees with the Director’s intervention in her daughter’s life. [ 5 ] The child’s lawyer agrees with the application.

ISSUES [ 6 ] Are the security and development of the child in danger for a situation of educational neglect? [ 7 ] If so, can the child remain in her mother’s care? THE FACTS

[ 8 ] The child suffers from a mild intellectual delay. She also has hearing and vision problems. She attends a specialized class at school due to her learning disabilities. [ 9 ] On November 14, 2019, Judge Lyne Morin declared that the security and development of the child are in danger due to neglect of health care and on educational level. The Court ordered that the child be entrusted to her mother with a social follow-up for 6 months.

After this period, the case is closed. [ 10 ] On September 10, 2021, the Director retained a new report regarding the situation of the child which reported that the child would be left alone without supervision until late at night. [ 11 ] The Director was made aware of two police interventions concerning the child. [ 12 ] On May 16, 2021, at around 8 p.m., the police received a call from a woman who talked to a little girl in a park and asked her why she was alone. The child then told her about sex videos she had seen on TikTok.

The child also exhibited strange behaviour such as using vulgar language and lifting up her shirt. [ 13 ] The officers located the child and brought her home. The mother explained that she did not know that the child left to play at the park. She added that the child can’t show sex videos on TikTok because she turned on a parental filter. The mother was aggressive towards the police officers. [ 14 ] On September 5, 2021, the police received another report saying that the child often goes to the convenience store and stays for 30 to 45 minutes.

The child told the person working at the convenience store that she leaves the house when men show up and give money to her mother. [ 15 ] On one occasion, two employees walked the child home, and the mother answered the door completely naked. A man, also naked, was there. The person making the complaint is concerned that the mother may engage in prostitution and that the child must leave the house at these times. [ 16 ] The police officers met the mother at her apartment and told her the facts of their investigation.

The mother denied the allegations and became angry with them and insulted them in the presence of the child. The child also insulted and kicked the officers. [ 17 ] Upon leaving, the officers met a woman who mentioned to them that she worries about the safety and development of the child. She reported that the child is often alone outside and has a neglected appearance.

The mother uses a lot of marijuana and does not seem to take care of her daughter. [ 18 ] The director of the school attended by the child in 2021-2022 affirms that it is difficult to collaborate with the mother because she is difficult to reach, does not show up for meetings and does not pay school fees. [ 19 ] The child regularly comes to school with little or no food.

Her hearing aid is dysfunctional, and her glasses are broken. [ 20 ] The child often spends time alone in the school yard near her house, without supervision and can have disruptive behaviours. [ 21 ] The mother is bothered with her presence and does not understand why the DYP should be involved again. She affirms that she always watches her daughter when she plays outside. [ 22 ] The mother did confirm that the child often breaks her glasses and hearing aids, but she will get them fixed again.

She adds that she always provides food for her daughter at school. [ 23 ] The mother says that her daughter defies authority and that she does not listen to the rules. [ 24 ] On May 5, 2022, the Director closed the file since the mother was going to live with her sister and her husband in Ontario. [ 25 ] However, she stayed there only for a few weeks and returned to Town A. The Director intervened again in the situation. The mother refuses to collaborate and give access to the child. [ 26 ] The child has not attended school since her return.

She still needs hearing aids, new glasses and to see a dentist. [ 27 ] She should receive services from the CRDI, however, the case was closed because the mother moved and did not follow through with the services. [ 28 ] The Court was supposed to hear the case on July 13, 2022, however, the mother was not present.

The mother was given several attempts to attend Court, but was eventually taken to court by the police on July 29, 2022 when the child was entrusted provisionally to a foster care family. [ 29 ] At first, the Director was asking that the child be entrusted to her maternal aunt and uncle who live in Town B. However, after further consideration, the couple prefer that their niece be entrusted to a specialized foster care family.

They don’t have the support to make sure the child will be properly taken care of but want to stay involved in the life of their niece. [ 30 ] In August 2022, the Director was informed that the child is still not registered for school and does not have proper glasses or hearing aids. The mother maintains that she did register her daughter and is taking care of her appointments. [ 31 ] Since her placement, the child has supervised visits with her mother. [ 32 ] The child is transported to the visits by a case aid.

During the ride, on the way to the visit, the child talks about the fact that things are going great in the foster-care family.

[ 33 ] However, on the way back, she does not want to go back to the foster family. She describes negative things such as her foster mother does not take good care of her hair and or speak English.

She also talks negatively about the social worker. [ 34 ] The Director suggests that those remarks seem to be induced by the mother. [ 35 ] The mother makes promises to the child such as that she will get her an iPad or Airpods when she comes home. [ 36 ] The child believes that if she annoys the foster mother, she will be able to go back with her mother. [ 37 ] In the foster family, the child demonstrates some behavioral disturbances. She can be aggressive, lie and test the limits.

She has inappropriate sexual behaviors such as asking another kid to touch her bottom s . [ 38 ] She told her foster mother that she would sometimes beg for money with a squeegee with her mom and that she would stay out of the house late at night. She often talks about alcohol consumption and shows other kids how to slam a bottle. [ 39 ] The Director has found an English-speaking foster care family from the CRDI that has a good reputation. She would go to a specialized English school.

Unfortunately, it is very far from Town A in Town C, which complicates the organization of contacts between the mother and the child. [ 40 ] The mother testified that she is taking care of her child’s needs. She explained that it is difficult because she is suffering from breast cancer. She does not recognize s that she can be neglectful and minimizes the facts.

DECISION [1] Are the security and development of the child in danger for a situation of educational neglect? [2] The evidence reveals that the security and development of the child is in danger due to educational neglect. [3] The mother does not exercise adequate supervision of her child and does not manage to provide her with a framework and a routine adapted to her needs and particular situation.

There have been several reports in the last years and the situation has not improved since the judgment rendered by judge Morin in 2019. [4] The Court also concludes that the security and development of the child is in danger for a serious risk of health care neglect. [5] For months, the child was deprived of adequate glasses and hearing aids allowing her to see and understand better, due to the lack of organization and the negligence of the mother.

This is a vulnerable child who needs this support, especially since she has significant learning difficulties. [6] Can the child be maintained with her mother? [7] The child cannot be maintained with her mother without causing her a prejudice. [8] Before her placement, the child was demonstrating serious behavioral disturbances. Those behaviors are also present when she is with the foster family. She can be aggressive, lie and test the limits. She has inappropriate sexual behaviors aggressive towards peers. [9] She needs sustained support and a clear and constant routine framework.

The specialized foster care family can provide this environment. [10] The bond between the child and her mother is significant and the Director must make sure to support the mother to facilitate the organization of contacts given the distance from the foster family. [11] After having received the admissions, taking the reports produced and the testimonies heard into consideration, the Court concludes that the security and development of the child are in danger for serious behavioural disturbances according to

section 38 b) 1 (iii) and 38 b) 2 of the Youth Protection Act and that the situation gives rise to the measures sought.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [12] GRANTS the application; [13] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child are in danger; [14] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster care family chosen by the Director; [15] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that the Director of Youth Protection has found a specialized foster care family located in Town C; [16] RECOMMENDS that considering the distance that the Director of Youth Protection support the mother as to transportation; [17] ORDERS that the contacts between the mother and the child be following an agreement between the parties and that should there be no agreement, that the contacts be supervised; [18] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the contacts between the mother and the child take place once a week; [19] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the Director of Youth Protection evaluate the possibility that the contacts between the mother and the child take place at the mother’s domicile and that if she is organized that the child has day visits with the mother at her

domicile; [20] RECOMMENDS that a

schedule be made between the parties as to the contacts via Facetime or by phone or other social media; [21] ORDERS that the child attend school without delay and TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that the child will integrate her new foster care family in November 2022; [22] RECOMMENDS that the mother obtain the help of an in-house educator when the child visits with her; [23] ORDERS that the child receives certain health services more particularly that she gets her glasses and hearing aid without delay; [24] ORDERS that the mother take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [25] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that the mother allows the Director of Youth Protection to talk with the different professionals; [26] ORDERS that the mother report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures she applies to herself and to the child to put an end to the situation of compromission; [27] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counselling or assistance to the child and her family; [28] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the measures ordered; [29] THE WHOLE until June 28, 2023 . ________________________________ Mélanie Roy, J.C.Q.

Mtre Frédérique Earls-Bélanger Attorney for the DYP Mtre Kelly Ann Sinnett Attorney for the child Mtre Valérie Lavigne Attorney for the mother Dates of the hearing: September 13 and 28 and October 21, 2022 Judgment signed on: December 21, 2022