2022 QCCQ 12068, 2022 QCCQ 12068

Protection de la jeunesse — 227102 2022 QCCQ 12068 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF […] TOWN OF […] Youth Division No: 640-41-002111-174 DATE: October 19, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE NATHALIE SAMSON, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 2016 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] and [SOCIAL WORKER 2], in their quality of authorized person by the Director of Youth Protection A Applicant and A Mother and B Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON AN APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION ( sections 95(1) (2) and 75 , Youth Protection Act , CQLR., c.

P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcast of any information that would allow a child or the child’s parents to be identified. Every person who contravenes this provision commits an offence and is liable to a fine (ss. 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A. ). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection applied under s. 95 of the Youth Protection Act [1] for the extension of a decision rendered on September 2, 2021, by Honourable Dominique Wilhelmy, J.C.Q.

At that time, she declared that the security and development of the youth were still in danger . She entrusted the child to a family foster until August 31, 2022. [ 2 ] The Youth Director alleged that the security and development of the youth are still in danger under sections 38(b)(1)(iii), 38(

c) and 38.1(

c) of the Youth Protection Act . [2] [ 3 ] At the hearing, the mother was absent but duly notified. Youth Protection did not reach out to the father since the last report. They attempted to contact him on several occasions by radio, telephone and through home visits, but those attempts were unsuccessful and the father never showed interest in meeting with Youth Protection. The Court has authorized the Director to proceed in the absence of the parents. [ 4 ] The following facts were introduced in evidence. [ 5 ] The situation of the parents remains the same.

They have a history of alcohol and conjugal violence issues. Since the last court hearing, they have not mobilized themselves. They are currently unable to provide a stable environment for the child. The parents’ cooperation with Youth Protection is difficult. [ 6 ] The mother has not had contact with the child for a year. Youth Protection met with her and she submitted that she disagrees with her child’s placement and she would like to regain custody of her. Unfortunately, she is not there today to relate her situation. The Court can only note her absence at such an important moment.

The father did not show interest in the child’s life. He did not reach out to Youth Protection for contact. When the parents see their child in the community, they do not necessarily try to make contact with her. The Director of Youth Protection observed parental disinvestment since the child’s placement. [ 7 ] The child has been entrusted to C and D since April 12, 2021. The child is attached to her foster family. She is developing well and is supported in her difficulties. She verbalized that where she currently lives is her home.

The child has built a strong bond with her foster family and her evolution has improved positively since her placement. The child had an appointment with a social pediatrician and

the follow-up raised some concerns about her speech and language development. There is a collaborator from [organism A] who is offering the youth Sand Therapy and follow-up with a social pediatrician. They are able to support the foster family. [ 8 ] The foster parents give the child a proper routine to help her with her oppositional behaviours and great progress has been observed. She is doing well and tells her foster parents every day that she wants to be in their home. She wishes to remain under their care. She has been stabilizing with this family and has a strong bond with them.

The foster family wants to have her until she reaches the age of 18 years, despite the difficulties encountered. They do not see themselves not having her anymore and this idea makes them emotional. They want the best for her and they will continue to cooperate with the Director of Youth Protection and will do whatever becomes necessary to ensure the child’s safety and well-being. The foster family wants the child to have as much contact with her family as possible to maintain her Inuit culture. The foster family is part of the Cris Nation and lives in Town A.

They mentioned that it is important to them that the child knows her history and where she comes from. [ 9 ] The child was one year old at the beginning of the current placement. She has been entrusted since January 11, 2017, a period of seventy months. She is 5 years old today, she will turn 6 in a couple of days.

Throughout the last measure, neither parent had a visit with their daughter. [ 10 ] After taking into consideration the documentary evidence, the testimony and the positions of the parties, the Court finds that the evidence is sufficient to declare that security and development of the child are still in danger and that the measures suggested meet her needs and are deemed to be in her best interest.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 11 ] GRANTS this application; [ 12 ] EXTENDS the decision or order rendered on September 2, 2021; [ 13 ] DECLARES that the security or the development of the child continues to be in danger under sections 38(b)(1)(iii), 38(

c) and 38.1(

c) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 14 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family, chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre, namely C and D until she reaches the age of 18 years; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the child’s parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 16 ] ORDERS that the child’s parents report in person, at regular intervals, to the director to inform him of the current situation; [ 17 ] ORDERS that contact between the child and the parents be determined by the director as to the terms, frequency and degree of supervision; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the child receive all the health services required for her language difficulties; [ 19 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and the child’s family; [ 20 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X, to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 21 ] ORDERS the execution of the present judgment by any peace officer; [ 22 ] The WHOLE until […], 2034 (majority) . __________________________________ NATHALIE SAMSON, J.C.Q.

Mtre Adèle Cyr Cain Lamarre, s.e.n.c.r.l. Counsel for the D.Y.P. Mtre Cassandra Neptune Legal Aid Counsel for the child Mtre Angèle Tommasel Counsel for the mother Date of hearing: October 19, 2022