2017 QCCQ 16708, 2017 QCCQ 16708

Protection de la jeunesse — 177132 2017 QCCQ 16708 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001674-131 DATE: October 20, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on [...],2003 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in City A, district A, Québec Applicant and A, detained at Leclerc detention center in Laval, district of Laval, Québec Mother and B , residing and domiciled in City A, district A, Québec Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (sections 95 (par. 1) and 75 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 A submits to the Court a motion for revision of the decision rendered on October 12, 2016 by the undersigned concerning the situation of X, 14 years old. [ 2 ] After the child’s placement for few months at the Reception center, followed by a placement in a foster family until August 27, 2017, the applicant Mrs. [Social Worker 1] now requires an extension of his placement in foster family for 9 months. [ 3 ] At the hearing, the father is present, assisted by Me Marianne Leonard.

The detained mother is represented by Me Angèle Tommasel, Me Cassandra Neptune represents the child and Me Aubrée Coutanson the applicant. [ 4 ] The father admits many allegations and agrees with the placement of 9 months as suggested in the amended recommendations. [ 5 ] The mother admits few allegations and agrees with the amended measures. [ 6 ] The child admits all the allegations with few precisions, agrees to stay in a foster family but asks for a new one. [ 7 ] The youth integrated the present foster family in December 17, 2016.

During the first weeks of his placement, the youth adapted well to his environment, but his problematic behaviour came back to a point that the foster family gave up on him in February 2017. [ 8 ] The youth moved in three different foster families in March and April 2017. [ 9 ] The youth refused to go back to the foster homes and spend most of his time at his parent’s place. [ 10 ] On March 17, the police had to intervene with the youth as he was intoxicated and manipulating firearms. The mother was present but intoxicated. [ 11 ] In June, the foster family of Ms.

C accepted to foster him again. [ 12 ] Since the last Court hearing, the situation of the parents remains the same. They struggle with alcohol and conjugal violence issues. They are in and out of detention. The mother is currently detained. [ 13 ] The father improved his collaboration with the Director of Youth Protection, acknowledges his issues and agrees to develop his parental capacities. [ 14 ] In the last months, the father took action. He is able to impose some rules to his son and to communicate with him. The father

needs to develop more structures for his son. The mother will also have to improve if she really cares for X. [ 15 ] Before entrusting X to the parents, they need to prove that they are able to make positive changes, that they stabilize and be able to provide X’s needs. [ 16 ] Even if the youth really hopes to return with his parents, he has to respect the judgment and to offer a good collaboration.

He has to learn to express his emotions, deals with problems and accepts authority. [ 17 ] Even if he asks to change of foster family, the Court is not entitled to order it, it is the Director of Youth Protection who is entitled by the Youth Protection Act of such decision. [ 18 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 19 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 20 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still in danger; [ 21 ] ORDERS the placement of X in a foster family chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre with reintegration with the parents in the legal delay if the situation allows it, until May 22, 2018; [ 22 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to supervise the contacts between the youth and his parents as for the modalities, the frequency and degree of supervision; [ 23 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counselling or assistance to the youth and his parents until Mai 22, 2018; [ 24 ] ORDERS the parents to remain sober and without any violent behaviour in presence of the youth; [ 25 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide the youth and his parents the services of an external educator for the period deemed necessary by the professionals; [ 26 ] ORDERS the youth to collaborate actively with the social worker and the educator; [ 27 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate to the execution of the enactment; [ 28 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X to the Director of Youth Protection A for the purpose of executing the order; [ 29 ] RECOMMENDS to the Commission des droits de la personne et de la jeunesse to investigate on the respect of the previous judgment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Me Cassandra Neptune Attorney for the youth Me Aubrée Coutanson Attorney for the applicant Me Angèle Tommasel Attorney for the mother Me Marianne Leonard Attorney for the father Date of hearing: August 15, 2017