2019 QCCQ 15212, 2019 QCCQ 15212

Protection de la jeunesse — 1910367 2019 QCCQ 15212 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 635-41-000940-194 DATE: April 17, 2019 (written judgment rendered on October 15, 2019) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2007 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...] Applicant and A, residing and domiciled at [...] Mother and C, residing and domiciled at [...] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (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 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) asks the Court to declare that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2007, are endangered under

section 38 (b) (1) iii. [1] of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The Court is also seized with the situation of his brother Y, who is 13 years old. Position of the parties [ 3 ] The mother is present and represented by Me St-Amand. She admits most of the allegations, and she agrees with the measures. [ 4 ] The father is absent and not represented. [ 5 ] X who is 11 years old, is present and represented by Me Jennis. He admits some of the allegations, and he agrees with the measures. Facts [ 6 ] The situation of the two boys is known from the DYP since 2014, because of few reports received regarding them.

For some of them, the facts were not founded and for other ones, the security and development were not considered in danger. [ 7 ] On March 21, 2016, another report was retrained regarding negligence in terms of physical needs as the parents would fail to provide food for their children. The evaluation was done and the DYP concluded, one year later, that the situation of the two boys was endangered [2] . On March 8, 2017, voluntary measures were signed and the children were maintained with their parents with aid, counselling and assistance.

Those voluntary measures were renewed in December 2017. [ 8 ] On January 31, 2018, another report was received after a fight between the father, while he was intoxicated, and X. The mother was intoxicated at the neighbour’s house, but she intervened and called the police for assistance. The little sister was present and witnessed the scene. Y was absent at that time. The DYP concluded to an isolated event and did not conclude that the situation would be endangered for risk of physical abuse.

The follow-up continued to be done on the aspects of negligence. [ 9 ] In December 2018, the voluntary measures were renewed again. [ 10 ] X is described as a healthy and shy boy. He is in Grade 5. His attendance at school is very low, but when he is at school he is doing very well. He is playing hockey in the Hockey Team of Town A. He loves being at the Youth Centre. His parents have to insist for him to come earlier at home after hockey, but this aspect is challenging. Since February 2019, his attendance at school continues to decrease.

[ 11 ] The DYP requested a psychological evaluation for X as a difficulty to manage his emotions is observed. The parents agree with this evaluation. [ 12 ] The family receives the services of an external educator once every two weeks. The objective is to help the parents to impose a structure to ensure the schooling of their children. [ 13 ] On January 23, 2019, a meeting took place at school with the mother, the children, the external educator and the teacher of each child. [ 14 ] The parents are conscious about their alcohol consumption issues.

They are aware of the resources available in the community, but they did not reach them. Nevertheless, they were able to reduce their consumption since the DYP is involved. Moreover, before drinking they are now able to take steps to set out a safety plan for the children. [ 15 ] Their financial situation improved since the mother has a new job, so their difficulty to provide food for their children diminish a lot. They also benefit from help of the extended family.

Analysis [ 16 ] Considering the evidence and the admissions made by the parties, the Court concludes that the security and the development of the children are endangered. [ 17 ] The measures suggested are in their best interest. The psychological evaluation, even if already requested, will be ordered as it’s a necessity in the situation of those children. It’s urgent to know what it’s so difficult for them to go to school.

More we wait to impose this routine to them, more difficult it will be to convince them to go to school. [ 18 ] This evaluation will help the school, the DYP, the external educator and the parents to intervene with their sons according to their respective specific needs. [ 19 ] The parents are collaborative and want the best for their children. They deserve to receive the appropriate tools to do it. FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the application; [ 21 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child , born on [...], 2007, are in danger under

section 38 (b) (1) iii. of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the child remain with the parents; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the parents periodically report to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in their child’s regard to put an end to the situation; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the child attend school on a daily basis; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the parents remain sober in the presence of the child; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the child and the family receive the services of an external educator until no longer deemed necessary by professionals; [ 28 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents seek help through Social Services concerning their alcohol, drugs and personal issues; [ 29 ] ORDERS that a psychological evaluation of the child be performed and recommendations be followed; [ 30 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to have access to the child’s medical and schooling files and to provide a copy to the psychologist; [ 31 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and his family; [ 32 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X, to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 33 ] THE WHOLE until December 31, 2019. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Geneviève Apollon, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Caroline Jennis, attorney for the child Me Félix St-Amand, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: April 17, 2019