2013 QCCQ 7744, 2013 QCCQ 7744

Protection de la jeunesse — 131371 2013 QCCQ 7744 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] VILLAGE OF […] Youth Division No. 640-41-001459-129 DATE: February 7, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS J.C.Q. _____________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A C.Y.P.C., working in Town A Applicant and X, born on […], 2009 Child and A Mother and B Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The applicant in this case submitted an application for the review of the judgment that I rendered on June 19, 2012, declaring at that time that the security and development of the child X, now a little over three years old, were in danger. [ 2 ] At the time of that first judgment, it was ordered that the little girl be placed with a foster family for a period of six months, with the possibility of returning to her mother, if the situation allowed. [ 3 ] On the date initially set for presentation of the motion, the parties, except the child, who was too young to take a position, indicated their acknowledgment that the facts having led to the declaration of endangerment still applied, but expressed the wish that X be entrusted to her grandmother rather than being placed in a foster home unknown to her. [ 4 ] As the youth protection authorities had not had a chance to assess the grandmother’s family environment, they requested an adjournment in order to examine that alternative. [ 5 ] The matter therefore came before the Court again, on January 8, and the applicant indicated that the home proposed by the parents was acceptable and that the child had been entrusted to her grandmother, C, on December 5, 2012. [ 6 ] From the evidence heard and the admissions made at the hearing, the Court notes that, as the situation having caused the endangerment remains essentially the same, the motion in that respect should be allowed. [ 7 ] As for the appropriate measure, it appears that Ms.

C is able to care for the child adequately and meet her needs. [ 8 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT:

[ 9 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 10 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X, born on […], 2009, are still in danger; [ 11 ] ORDERS the placement of the child X with her grandmother C for a period of six months starting on January 8, 2013; [ 12 ] AUTHORIZES supervised visitation rights for the parents under the terms and conditions set by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 13 ] ORDERS that aid, counselling and assistance be provided to X and her family for a period of 12 months; [ 14 ] ORDERS the parents to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection; [ 15 ] ENTRUSTS the child’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection, who shall see that the measures are carried out; [ 16 ] ORDERS the execution of this judgment by any peace officer, if necessary. __________________________________ JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS J.C.Q.

Mtre. Robert-André Adam Cain Lamarre Casgrain Wells Counsel for the applicant Mtre. Cassandra Neptune Centre communautaire juridique A Counsel for the child Mtre. Sarah Plamondon Counsel for the mother Mtre. Michel Solomon Counsel for the father Date of hearing: January 8, 2013