2022 QCCQ 13776, 2022 QCCQ 13776

Protection de la jeunesse — 228388 2022 QCCQ 13776 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] «Youth Division»

N° : 505-41-009676-190 DATE : December 14, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDED BY JUSTICE MÉLANIE ROY ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A , Applicant -and- X , born on [...], 2011 Child -and- A Mother -and- B Father J U D G E M E N T Sections 95(1) and (2) 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 offense and is liable to a fine (sections 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A .) [ 1 ] The child is 11 years old.

He lives with his mother accordingly to the last judgment rendered on September 6, 2022. [ 2 ] The Youth Protection Director (the Director) petitions this Court with an application for revision and extension of this last decision. [ 3 ] She alleges that the child is need of specialized services and rehabilitation and recommends that he be entrusted to a reception centre with a social follow-up for a period of one year. [ 4 ] The mother agrees with the recommendations. [ 5 ] The Court authorized the Director to proceed without his presence. [ 6 ] The child explains that he cannot agree to go into a rehabilitation centre but that he will respect the Court’s decision.

He says that his behavior has improved and that he is going less often to the “block.” [ 7 ] The evidence reveals that since the last Court order, the child remained with his mother. [ 8 ] Over the last months, his behavior has become increasingly violent. The mother was reporting daily anger outburst, and two to three major crises per week.

[ 9 ] On October 30, 2022, the police had to intervene at the mother’s home due to the child’s violence. He was taken to the hospital because of suicidal threats and released the day after. [ 10 ] On November first, he got again very aggressive. He locked his mother and the CRDI educator out of the house and grabbed a knife while the other members of his family, including his two-year-old brother was in there.

The mother and educator managed to get back in the house and disarmed the child. [ 11 ] After that incident, the child was entrusted to a rehabilitation centre. [ 12 ] For the moment, the child is still not in a CRDI’s specialized unit. He is by himself in a unit at the [resource A]. As he was diagnosed with an intellectual disability, he is considered as high priority for transfer. [ 13 ] He goes to school four days a week and has been attending every day. He continues to attend school A despite the placement. [ 14 ] He has regular contacts with his parents and with his paternal uncle, C.

The father has just recently begun seeing his son. [ 15 ] The CRDI’s educator visits the child once a week. The mother will also be asked to participate. [ 16 ] The mother testifies to the fact that she does not always have all the information and that it can become very exhausted. She fully collaborates and continues to be devoted to her son. [ 17 ] The child suffers from complex trauma which affects all spheres in his life. He needs the structured, stable, predictable, and specialized living environment that a rehabilitation centre can offer.

It is in his best interest to be transferred as soon as possible in a CRDI unit that is even more specialized. [ 18 ] After having received the admissions, taken into consideration the reports produced and the testimonies heard, the Court concludes that the security and development of the child are still in danger and that the situation gives rise to the measures sought.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 19 ] GRANTS the application; [ 20 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child are still in danger; [ 21 ] REVISE AND EXTEND the Court order rendered on September 6, 2022, in the present file; [ 22 ] O RDERS that the child be entrusted to an institution operating a rehabilitation centre chosen by the Director of Youth Protection A; [ 23 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the child be entrusted to a resource of the CRDI as soon as possible; [ 24 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the child continue to receive services from the CRDI; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and his parents be following agreement between the parties; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the child and his parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 27 ] RECOMMENDS that the child stay in the same school, [School A] if that’s possible depending on the resource of the CRDI; [ 28 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counselling or assistance to the child and his family; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the present judgment; [ 30 ] THE WHOLE for a period of one year. ________________________________ Mélanie Roy, J.C.Q. Mtre Karine Nantais Attorney for the DYP Mtre Myriam Couillard Attorney for the child Mtre Lucie Gaucher Attorney for the mother Date of the hearing : December 14, 2022