2016 QCCQ 17452, 2016 QCCQ 17452

Protection de la jeunesse — 168564 2016 QCCQ 17452 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 145-41-000274-073 DATE: November 30, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant -and- X born on [...], 2000 Adolescent -and- A -and- B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ JA1013 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 ] The Director of youth protection (DYP) asks the Court to revise and extend the order rendered on April 6, 2016, in respect of the adolescent. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the DYP requests to be dispensed to serve the application to the parents. [ 3 ] Concerning the father, the DYP makes that request because he is nowhere to be found. The DYP attempted to serve him the proceedings by recommended mail to the latest address they had in Ottawa. They did not hear from him.

The social worker had several communications with the father but the last time she spoke with him, was around March or April 2016. For these reasons and for the best interest of the adolescent, the hearing will proceed. The Court will dispense the serving of this application to the father. [ 4 ] On the mother’s side, the DYP requested to be dispensed of the serving of the application since she is nowhere to be found. The DYP attempted to retrace her unsuccessfully. Moreover, they use a specialized firm [1] to retrace her without any result.

For these reasons and for the best interest of the adolescent, the hearing will proceed. The Court will also dispense the serving of the application to the mother. [ 5 ] The adolescent is present and duly represented. Even if he denies many facts of the application, his counsel expresses his consent to the measures suggested by the DYP. He also agrees to the filing of the report to value the testimony of their respective authors. However, no evidence is submitted by him in the case. [ 6 ] Since the beginning of his son’s placement, the social worker never spoke with the mother.

Basically, she was not involved throughout his life. The father is also absent from his son's life. [ 7 ] The adolescent is sixteen year’s old. He is diagnosed with an attention deficit disorder (ADHD), for which he is not medicated. He also shows signs of attachment disorder. He is not attending school since the beginning of the year because of all his moving. However, he does not care about going to school. [ 8 ] Since the last Court order, the adolescent’s situation worsened. He is putting himself in risky situations.

His behaviour puts him at risk of endangerment, such as running away and increasing his consumption of drugs and alcohol.

[ 9 ] He seems to go back and forth in regards to his conduct. In the previous months, he made some progress in growth and development. A positive change was noticed in his attitude and behaviour. All this changed dramatically and went down in a spiral. His behaviour of defiance and disrespect came back quickly. [ 10 ] On May 20, 2016, the adolescent reintegrates his foster family at the end of his placement in A Rehabilitation Center . After his arrival, he rapidly became defiant with the family.

He did not respect his curfew, uses drugs and even sneaks out of the house through his bedroom window. [ 11 ] On June 5 th , 2016, he was suspended from school, and his was returned to A rehabilitation center as his foster family could not handle him anymore nor his attitude of defiance towards them. [ 12 ] On June 7, 2016, he ran away from A Rehabilitation Center. He was apprehended by a police officer after having hijacked a car at the A mall parking lot in Town A.

Because of his conduct, he was transferred into B rehabilitation unit. [ 13 ] On August 15, 2016, he came back to A Rehabilitation Center with an attempt to progressively reintegrate him into his foster family. [ 14 ] On September 7, 2016, he returned to live fully with his foster family after an improvement of his behaviour. [ 15 ] On September 22, 2016, he was sent back to B readaptation unit, after an incident at his grandmother’s home where he committed a break and enter and theft. [ 16 ] At B readaptation unit, the interveners felt that the adolescent was fragile and not ready to be returned, considering the risk for him to run away again. [ 17 ] He remains closed and very impulsive.

He has no regards for the consequence of his actions. [ 18 ] Basically, after reading the entire documentary and the testimonial evidence, the Court acknowledges that the adolescent has little disregard for his actions and believes that he can take care of himself alone. He does not accept accountability for his actions. In fact, he does not take any responsibility. His though and uses words sounding like a “gang lifestyle”. He refuses to cease his consumption of drugs and alcohol by stating that it is not a big deal.

Furthermore, he still very defiant to the people involved with him. [ 19 ] Moreover, if we go more deeply into the adolescent issues, we cannot put aside that he has the potential to go so much further, but something makes him act out the way he does. Of course, his parents being mostly unexistent in his life, must have, without a doubt, an impact on him. While in court at his hearing, he shows another side of him. He was calm and respectful.

This means that he is well able to behave correctly when he puts is mind into it. [ 20 ] However, the proof reveals that the adolescent needs services and a structured environment. The rehabilitation center is the only option for him to get the help he requires for the moment. An option in which he expresses his consent. [ 21 ] He will have to make a consistent change in his conduct and to show durability in his good behaviour in order for him to better his life and for the persons around him to stay involve in his life. He has to work on his issues to be able to improve himself.

The problem is that the only person who can achieve that it is him. Until then, he requires an environment with discipline, structure and consistency. [ 22 ] The evidence demonstrates that the security and development of the adolescent are still in danger. Under the circumstances, the application is well founded. The suggested measures appear to be in the best interest of this adolescent.

FOR THESE REASONS AND THOSE EXPRESSED ORALLY AT THE HEARING, THE COURT: [ 23 ] DISPENSES the DYP to serve the application for revision and extension of order to the parents; [ 24 ] GRANTS the application for revision and extension or order; [ 25 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still considered to be in danger according to

section 38 of the youth protection act ; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to a Rehabilitation Center designated by the DYP until May 30, 2017; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the adolescent participate with an External Educator to learn coping and communication skills; [ 28 ] RECOMMENDS that the adolescent receive a psychological assessment and counseling if deemed necessary; [ 29 ] RECOMMENDS that the adolescent participate in an addictions assessment and counseling if deemed necessary; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the adolescent attend school regularly; [ 31 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and his foster family until May 30, 2017; [ 32 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent to the DYP of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A for the carrying out of the present order.

__________________________________ CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. Me Louyse A. Lemieux for the applicant Me Alexis Deschênes for the adolescent Mrs. A the mother (absent) Mr. B the father (absent) Date of hearing: November 30, 2016 Written judgment filed on December 15, 2016