2021 QCCQ 17048, 2021 QCCQ 17048

Protection de la jeunesse — 217560 2021 QCCQ 17048 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF […] TOWN OF […] Youth Division No: 640-41-002531-207 DATE: October 8, 2021 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CHRISTIAN LEBLANC J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X born on [...], 2019 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], in her quality of authorized person by the Director A, having a place of business in […]; Applicant and A, residing and domiciled at […] Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 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 review and prolong a decision rendered by Justice Peggy Warolin, J.C.Q. on February 25 th 2021 regarding the child X , born on [...], 2019. [ 2 ] At that date, the Court declared the security and development of the child in danger under

section 38 (b) (2) of the Youth Protection Act and entrusted the child to a foster family. [ 3 ] The Director submits that the current situation does not allows the return of the child to his parents and that therefore, the placement has to be prolonged. [ 4 ] Indeed, the DYP allege that since the last Court order, the situation of the mother remained mostly the same.

She still displays alcohol consumption issues and conjugal violence issues. [ 5 ] Therefore, the DYP is asking the Court to entrust the child to the same foster family that the child have been living with during the last measure, until the child reach majority. Position of the parties [ 6 ] The mother is present and represented. She recognizes that the security and development of her child are still in danger and she makes many factual admissions.

Furthermore, she express her consent with the measures proposed to the Court by the DYP. [ 7 ] The child is quite young and is represented under a legal mandate. [ 8 ] The child’s lawyer submits to the Court that the measures suggested are in his best interest. Facts and analysis [ 9 ] As I mentioned earlier, the mother made many factual admissions.

Basically, she denies that her situation remain mostly the same, but she admits everything else. [ 10 ] Although the mother still struggles with personal issues, she offers a good collaboration with the DYP and with the foster family that is currently caring for her child. [ 11 ] It have been established in Court that during the last measure, the mother did not respect the contacts calendar that had been set by the DYP, but the Court was also informed that the former boyfriend of the mother didn’t allow her to be out of the house in order to attend the video contact that were organised at the DYP office. [ 12 ] She is no longer with that boyfriend.

[ 13 ] The evidence presented to the Court also established clearly that the mother and the foster parents are in good terms. They have contacts on a regular basis and they are comfortable with each other. [ 14 ] Considering the child age, the maximum delay of placement have been reached already. Therefore, the DYP is asking for a majority placement for the child. [ 15 ] The foster parents testified of their attachment to the child and to their willingness and motivation to care for X until he reach majority.

They also have a child of their own, which is almost of the same age. [ 16 ] They are also quite clear about their willingness to make room so that the mother and X could continue to develop their relation. [ 17 ] Since the foster parents are non-Inuit, they also testified to the steps they are taking to ensure that X is exposed to his Inuit family and culture while growing up. [ 18 ] Mr. B have been learning Inuktitut since 3 years now and the foster parents currently live in the community A, which facilitate the regular contacts of the child with the mother. [ 19 ] As for Mrs.

C, she add that she is the cook of the family and that she do her best to include traditional food in the family menu. [ 20 ] At the end, spontaneously, the mother thanked the foster parents for taking such a good care of X and the foster parents thanked the mother for the trust she have shown to them. [ 21 ] This honest and emotional exchange between the mother and the foster parents is an eloquent demonstration that the measures proposed by the DYP are in the child’s best interest.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 22 ] GRANTS the application ; [ 23 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child are still in danger; [ 24 ] REVISES AND EXTENDS the decision rendered on February 25 th , 2021; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted until the age of majority to the foster family of Mrs. C and Mr. B; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the child’s mother takes an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the child’s mother reports in person, at regular intervals, to the Director to inform him of the current situation; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the mother remains sober in the presence of the child; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the mother remains without any violent behaviour in the presence of the child; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and the mother be determined by the Director as for the modalities, the frequency and the degree of supervision; [ 31 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and the child’s 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 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate to the execution of the enactment; [ 34 ] The whole until [...], 2037. __________________________________ CHRISTIAN LEBLANC , J.C.Q.

Me Justine Carli, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Me Angele Tommasel, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: October 8 th , 2021