2013 QCCQ 17624, 2013 QCCQ 17624

Protection de la jeunesse — 136215 2013 QCCQ 17624 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001534-129 DATE: December 2, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: x , born […], 1996 [Social Worker 1] , Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Social Services A, working in City A, district A (Quebec) […] Applicant a , residing and domiciled in City A, district A (Quebec) […] Mother B , residing and domiciled in City B, district B (Quebec) Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection makes an application to revise the decision rendered by this Court on February 12, 2013. [ 2 ] The youth is present and represented by a lawyer.

Both parents are present and represented by a lawyer. [ 3 ] On February 12, 2013 the Court declares that the security or development of the youth was in danger pursuant to

section 38

f) of the Youth Protection Act . The Court endorses a draft agreement signed by all the parties.

According to that draft agreement the youth is entrusted at a reception center for eight months because of her behavioral problems. [ 4 ] According to the applicant the youth still displays behavioral problems despite all the help provided to her and her family by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 5 ] The applicant recommends that the youth be entrusted at a reception center until the end of the school year with the possibility to reintegrate with her mother. [ 6 ] The mother agrees with all the applicant's recommendations.

Even if at the beginning she wishes to have her daughter back home she understands that the youth has to finish her school year. [ 7 ] The father and the youth agree with the applicant's recommendations. The youth wants to finish her school year at the A reception center. [ 8 ] All the parties admit that the security or development of the youth is still in danger. [ 9 ] The Court considers the following facts as proven and relevant to this case. The facts [ 10 ] Since her placement at the A readaptation center the youth is not going well. She still displays behavior problems.

She ran away several times from the reception center and been aggressive towards the staff and other clients. She even damaged one of the staff's eyeglasses. [ 11 ] The youth didn't show any motivation to go to a treatment center as proposed by her social worker. The youth has still alcohol related problems that she needs to acknowledge. However the youth seems to be motivated to attend school and finish her school year in A. [ 12 ] According to [Social Worker 2] who is a consultant for the Social Service A, it is now possible to proceed to a FASD (Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder) assessment.

It is important to proceed to that assessment now in order to know if the youth suffers from that syndrome. If she suffers from that syndrome she will have special needs for the rest of her life. [ 13 ] The mother has improved her situation. She claims to be sober since June. She didn't request any services for her alcohol problem.

[ 14 ] The mother still lives with her family members. One of her daughters lives there with her boyfriend as well. She is expecting a child and the mother is there to help her. [ 15 ] The father resides in City B with his family. For the past seven years he has not been involved in the life of the youth. However he occasionally communicates with her by telephone.

He still has personal issues with alcohol. [ 16 ] Since the placement of her child the father never did request to have her for visit at his place. [ 17 ] The relationship between the youth and the mother became distant because of their problem with alcohol.

However the relationship has slightly improved since the mother has been sober. [ 18 ] The youth and her father have minimum contacts. [ 19 ] Because of their own personal issues both parents cannot control or supervise their youth's behavior. [ 20 ] Considering all the evidence and the admissions from all the parties the Court concludes that the security and development of the youth are still compromised. [ 21 ] The Court also considers that the applicant's recommendations are appropriate, reasonable and in the youth's best interest.

For these reasons the Court: [ 22 ] Grants the motion; [ 23 ] Maintains that the security and development of X, born […], 1996 are still compromised; [ 24 ] Entrusts the youth to a reception center until June 20, 2014 with the possibility to reintegrate with the mother if the situation allows it; [ 25 ] Orders that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counselling and assistance to the youth and her family until the age of majority; [ 26 ] Orders that the youth receives specific health care and health services more precisely a psychological follow-up and FASD assessment; [ 27 ] Orders that the contacts between the youth and her parents be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for the modalities, the frequency and the length; [ 28 ] Recommends that the parents take the necessary steps to seek help regarding their situation; [ 29 ] Orders any police body to collaborate for the purpose of executing this enactment; [ 30 ] Entrusts the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection of the Social Service A who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ Josée Bélanger, J.C.Q.

Me Robert-André Adam, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Yan Massé, attorney for the youth and the father Me Ratha Heang, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: October 22, 2013