2012 QCCQ 11601, 2012 QCCQ 11601

Protection de la jeunesse — 123112 2012 QCCQ 11601 COURT OF QUEBEC YOUTH DIVISION CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] No: 525-41-025854-126 DATE: May 29, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE ANN-MARIE JONES, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ Director of Youth Protection A Applicant - and - X Born on […], 2011 - and - A Respondents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGEMENT

Section 38 Y.P.A. ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: Within the framework of the Youth Protection Act , no person may publish or broadcast information allowing 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. [Y.P.A. sections 11.2.1 and 135] [ 1 ] The Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of May 29, 2012, in accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The Court was presented with a motion by the Director of Youth Protection to have the security and development of the child declared compromised under

section 38 b) 2) and

c) of the Youth Protection Act , as that there is a serious risk that the mother does not meet the child’s basic needs. [ 3 ] The principal facts alleged in support of the motion are the following: • The child was known to the [center A] in July 2011 for issues pertaining to inappropriate supervision and the mother’s drug consumption; • During the [center A] involvement, the mother left with the child without prior notification and established herself in Montreal with the child; • There is a serious risk that the mother does not meet the child’s basic needs, more particularly: . the mother acknowledges that she was involved in a series of violent relationships; . the mother’s most recent relationship led to a police intervention following a dispute between herself and her partner, which degenerated into a physical altercation in the presence of the child; . on March 5, 2012, the police arrested the mother’s partner and conditions are pending for the partner not to communicate with the mother; . the mother has since verbalized that one contact occurred with her partner despite the restraining order in place; . on March 13, 2012, the mother and child went to live with the maternal grandmother; . the mother and the maternal grandmother have a conflictual relationship; . the mother comes and goes as she pleases and leaves the child with inadequate supervision;

. on April 25, 2012, the mother left the child sleeping on the bed alone while she was outside the building smoking; . on April 27, 2012, under an informal agreement, the mother entrusted the child to the maternal grandmother as she went to reside with friends; . the mother admits to daily marijuana consumption; . the mother presently does not have a stable residence; . the mother does not have any income and has no means to provide for the child’s basic needs; • The maternal grandmother expresses that she no longer wishes to care for the child and is refusing to collaborate with the case worker to evaluate her home situation; • The mother is not, at this point in time, in a position to care for the child; • On May 3, 2012, immediate protective measures were invokes and the child was placed in a foster home. [ 4 ] The Director of Youth Protection recommends that the child be entrusted to foster care for a period of six months, with reintegration to her mother’s care after three months, if the situation allows.

Furthermore, that a social follow-up be provided to the family for a period of six months. [ 5 ] The mother admits the majority of the facts alleged in the motion and says that she agrees for X to remain in foster care for a few months. The mother agrees to undergo a psychological evaluation with a parental capacity component and to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection. She wishes to see X as often as possible. [ 6 ] The Court also heard the testimony of Ms. [Social Worker 1], social worker, and read the report the Director filed as proof of the child’s situation.

The evidence reveals that the mother is very young and that her lifestyle is unstable. Currently she is living with friends, but says that she has signed a lease for an apartment starting July 1, 2012. The mother explains that the rent is 900 $ a month and that she will be able to pay this amount, as the father of the child will pay half the rent. [ 7 ] The social worker describes the mother’s situation as page six of the Court Report as follows: This worker observes a lack of mobilisation to follow through on tasks that will enable Ms. A to live independently.

It is of concern that in the three months that she has been living in Quebec that she has not yet secured financial assistance or made efforts to establish her own residence, despite clearly stating that she wishes to live on her own. Ms. A demonstrates an immaturity and impulsiveness that result in an unstable living situation for X. Although the grandmother’s presence and support represents a protective element in the short term, she does not for the moment represent a structuring influence to help mobilize Ms.

A to achieve autonomy or prevent her from leaving with X to a living situation that renders them economically dependant and vulnerable to violence. [ 8 ] Furthermore, the social worker explains that the contacts between the mother and the child are supervised, as mother left Town A with the child without prior notification to the [center A]. However, the mother was present for all the visits with her daughter, except for one and she informed the youth worker that she could not be present. [ 9 ] Under the circumstances, it is in the child’s best interest to be entrusted to foster care for a period of six months.

The contacts between the mother and the child need to be encouraged and progressively extended. However, the mother must stabilize her living situation and collaborate fully with the Director of Youth Protection before she can regain custody of her daughter.

Therefore a gradual reintegration after three months can not be considered at this time. [ 10 ] The evidence and the admissions made have convinced the Court that the security and development of the child are compromised. [ 11 ] THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 12 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 13 ] DECLARES compromised the security and development of the child, X; [ 14 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to foster care for a period of six months; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the mother and the child, including supervision if deemed necessary, be determined by the Director of Youth Protection, after discussion with the mother; [ 16 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the mother and the child be encouraged; [ 17 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that DYP will be filing the child’s birth certificate in the court file within two months; [ 18 ] ORDERS the mother to ensure that the child is not exposed to any type of violence; [ 19 ] ORDERS the mother not to use drugs while her daughter is in her care; [ 20 ] ORDERS the mother to participate in a psychological assessment with a parental capacity component and to follow the recommendations of the assessment and TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE of the mother's consent to submit to a psychological assessment;

[ 21 ] ORDERS that the Director of Youth Protection be authorized to exchange information with the family’s treating professionals; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the mother collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection, meet with the youth worker when requested and inform the youth worker of any change in her living situation 24 hours in advance; [ 23 ] RECOMMENDS that the Director of Youth Protection meet with the mother’s current boyfriend; [ 24 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the child and her family for a period of six months; [ 25 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X, to the Director of Youth Protection of Batshaw Youth and Family Centres, who shall see that the measures are carried out; [ 26 ] ORDERS the execution of the present order by any peace officer.

Signed on June 7, 20112 Ann-Marie Jones, J.C.Q. AMJ/dg Me Anne-Marie Dodds Counsel for the Director of Youth Protection Me Pauline Laforce Counsel for the child Date of hearing: May 29, 2012