2022 QCCQ 14541, 2022 QCCQ 14541

Protection de la jeunesse — 229108 2022 QCCQ 14541 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000786-186 DATE: March 24, 2022 (written judgment rendered on May 19, 2022) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2004 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], in her quality of authorized person by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A Applicant and A 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 on February 23, 2021, regarding the adolescent X, born on [...], 2004.

At that date the Court declared the security and development still endangered and entrusted the adolescent to a rehabilitation centre for 12 months, with integration in a foster family if the situation allows it. [ 2 ] The DYP submits that the situation does not allow to return the youth to his mother and that the placement in a rehabilitation centre has to be prolonged until he reaches his majority. Position of the Parties [ 3 ] Despite many attempts, the bailiff was not serving to the mother, but the DYP worker was able to meet with her a few days ago and gave her a copy of the application.

She also told the mother that her presence is required. This morning, she went to the mother’s place to pick up her, but the mother was not there. The mother called 10 minutes later saying that she does not feel good, so she would not be at the court hearing. The DYP ignores from where she called from as well as if she still lives at her last known address. The Court proceeded in the absence of the mother. [ 4 ] The youth is present and represented by Me Samuel Richard Guertin on a legal mandate despite his age.

After hearing the evidence, Me Richard submit to the Court that the situation of the youth continue to be endangered and that the recommended measures are in his best interest. History of the Situation [ 5 ] On November 24, 2016 , X was assessed by a psychologist. He was 12 years old. The specialist confirmed the attentional and academic difficulties X experienced for several years.

The professional recommended: - Supportive counselling to address X’s grief surrounding the loss of his father, if possible offered by a familiar worker with inclusion of psychoeducation on grief; - Using of assistive technology to facilitate his learning; - Consultation with a doctor or pediatrician to further investigate a possible ADHD; - A speech-language assessment; - For the transition to high school, he should be directed toward classes at the applied level, specifically those that are technical and

hands-on in terms of instruction and assignment expectations. [ 6 ] On April 19, 2018 , the Court was seized with an application for provisional measure and entrusted the child to his maternal grandparents. [ 7 ] On June 27, 2018 , the Court was seized with an application for protection. X was 13 ½ years old. X and his siblings were known from the DYP as they were the object of decisions rendered by the Youth Chamber and measures of protection were applied until May 2013. The father passed away in 2015.

The DYP received reports regarding difficulties for the mother to fulfill the child’s basic needs and schooling. She was also involved in a violent relationship and surrounded by people known to be alcohol and drug users. X had important learning difficulties and followed an adapted program to facilitate his schooling. After being entrusted to his grandparents, his school attendance improved. Unfortunately, he started consuming drugs and alcohol. The youth was waiting to be assessed by a speech therapist as the mother did not sign the consent.

The grandparents were very involved in the situation of X and his siblings. [ 8 ] The Court declared the security and development of the child endangered and entrusted him to his maternal grandparents.

The Court also ordered that he receive the health care services he needed (notably a speech-language assessment, personal follow-up for grieving and follow-up with a pediatrician) and withdrawn certain attributes of parental authority from the mother and granted it to the grandparents, the whole for a period of 18 months. [ 9 ] On August 5, 2019 , the Court rendered a provisional measure and entrusted the adolescent to a rehabilitation centre. [ 10 ] On August 22, 2019 , X was seen by the pediatrician, Dr. Perreault, because of his questionable behaviours (speaking alone, laughing for nothing, impulsivity).

The specialist suspected a possible fetal exposition to alcohol and also note an important drug and alcohol consumption. Because of his opposition behaviour and non-attendance at school, he was suspended and during his free time he consumed more and more. He failed his school year. The youth considered having ADHD. The specialist indicated a few checking to be done in the following months, notably an evaluation from a child psychiatrist. [ 11 ] On September 24, 2019 , the Court revised the situation. The mother had an important drug consumption issue, and she was not involved in the youth’s life.

X stopped going to school and spent his days sleeping or playing video games. The grandparents were tired about the situation and X not respecting their authority. X refused to receive help for the grief about his father. The Court entrusted the adolescent to a rehabilitation centre for a period of 9 months and ordered that he receive health care services notably a speech-language assessment and follow-ups with the pediatrician and the child psychiatrist. [ 12 ] On June 2, 2020 , the Court revised the situation.

Since the last decision, the adolescent was transferred to an intensive unit in Town A to ensure his safety and the safety of the others. He stayed there until May 2020, and was transferred back to a regular unit. He was met by a psychiatrist. He also received an individual and constant supervision from an educator. The mother was still not involved in her child’s life. Following the medical recommendations, the youth did not attend school.

The Court maintained the youth to a rehabilitation centre for 9 months with a reintegration at the grandparents’ place if they accept to receive training and if the situation allows it. If not, the Court ordered the DYP to look for a foster family for the end of the measures. [ 13 ] On February 23, 2021 , the Court revised the situation. Since the last decision, the situation of the youth did not improve. He continued to have important psychotic symptoms, he was very oppositional and can be very unpredictable.

During the visits at his grandparents’ place, he uses his electronic device during many hours which is very detrimental for him. Integration in a foster family was tried, but the foster family quickly gave up due to the youth’s behaviour. The Court entrusted him to a rehabilitation centre for a period of 12 months with a reintegration in a foster family if the situation allows it and ordered that the adolescent continue to receive all the medical help that he needs.

Facts and Analysis [ 14 ] Since the last decision, X had to be hospitalized in Town B due to his psychotic issues and the adjustment of his medication. [ 15 ] X does not fully recognize nor understand his pathology. Moreover, he does not want to speak about it. [ 16 ] He would like to be back at his grandparents’ place, but that is not possible because he required a constant supervision. He needs to be reminded about all the basic aspects of the life. [ 17 ] Currently, the DYP is taking steps to prepare his adulthood. He needs to evolve in a safe environment.

An evaluation for tutorship is on the process, and the DYP is looking for different options. Going back to the grandparents, after he would turn 18, is not possible because the grandparents foster the siblings who need to be protected against any violent or sexual behaviour. [ 18 ] The rehabilitation centre offers him a very structured environment. For now, we ignore how X could react when he will integrate a less structured environment. [ 19 ] The DYP demonstrated that the situation of the youth continue to be endangered and that he still requires rehabilitation services.

Until he reaches his majority, the situation will be properly managed by the educators. The main concern now is the situation when he will have turned 18. [ 20 ] The DYP is fully aware of the seriousness of the situation and took the appropriate steps to prepare the adulthood. FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 21 ] GRANTS the application; [ 22 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the adolescent X, born on [...], 2004, are still endangered;

[ 23 ] ENTRUSTS the youth to a rehabilitation centre; [ 24 ] ORDERS that contacts between the youth and the maternal grandparents be favoured; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the frequency, duration and modalities of the contacts between the youth and the mother be determined by the Director of Youth Protection, including the presence of a third party if necessary; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the youth and the mother take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the youth receive health services required by his condition; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the youth continue his medical follow-up with the pediatrician, practitioner nurse as well as the child psychiatrist and that he respect the recommendations as for medical treatment and hospitalization if judged necessary; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the youth undergo a functional/psychological assessment if necessary in order to receive services for his condition; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the youth undergo assessment for tutorship or any relevant psychiatric services or units if judged necessary by the professionals; [ 31 ] ORDERS that the attributes of parental authority (medical, school, sports and activities) be withdrawn from the mother and GRANTS them to the grandmother Ms.

B, in the case that the mother cannot be reached; [ 32 ] AUTHORIZES the exchange of information between all professionals implicated in the family’s life to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the youth are endangered and to better plan his adulthood; [ 33 ] ORDERS any police body to collaborate for the execution of the measures; [ 34 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth X , to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of this order; [ 35 ] THE WHOLE until the youth’s majority. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Marie-Michelle Grenier, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Samuel Richard-Guertin, attorney for the youth Date of hearing: March 24, 2022