2011 QCCQ 14248, 2011 QCCQ 14248

Protection de la jeunesse — 113370 2011 QCCQ 14248 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth chamber No: 640-41-001329-108 DATE: July 6, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DANIEL BÉDARD, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 1997 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, C.Y.P.C., working in A town, district A, Quebec Applicant -and- A, residing and domiciled in A town, district A, Quebec Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (

Section 95 ( par.1) and 75 , Youth Protection Act , R.S.Q. c. P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ I - INTRODUCTION [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection demands the extension of the decision rendered on February 8, 2011, concerning X, born on […], 1997. [ 2 ] The mother and her daughter are present and represented. The father is undeclared. II - ISSUE TO RESOLVE [ 3 ] The Director recommends the extension of the foster care measure in a rehabilitation centre for a period of seven (7) months. The mother and her daughter disagree.

The teenager wishes to be reintegrated in the environment of the mother immediately. Furthermore, they deny many of the allegations, supporting the position of the Director of Youth Protection. III - ANALYSIS OF THE FACTS AND DECISION [ 4 ] The evidence tendered includes the testimonies of the social worker, the educator at the group home and the mother. Furthermore, the review report is filed as the observation report and the psychological assessment of the teenager. The admissions made by the teenager include runaways from the group home and the accident on April 27, 2011. The mother admits the suicidal.

The mother admits her poor collaboration and the transfer of her daughter in an intensive supervision unit in the rehabilitation centre. [ 5 ] The social worker's testimony establishes that the situation has not evolved positively. The teenager had to be transferred to a rehabilitation centre in town B following the impossibility to structure the child in a group home environment, less structured than a rehabilitation centre. Two transfers took place. The first transfer took place at the beginning of May 2011, for a period of nearly a month and upon her return, she attempted suicide.

She was again transferred on June 2, 2011 and is still fostered in the rehabilitation centre in B town. Her collaboration with the social worker is, as for the mother, minimal. [ 6 ] In the group home she assaulted members of the staff, ran away, consumed drugs and alcohol and on one of these occasion, had a snowmobile accident. She threatened to commit suicide and attempted suicide. The police had to intervene for some incidents and she was also confined in isolation. She also had to be brought to the hospital, had to be restrained in a straight jacket and sedated. These

incidents are explicitly described in the observation report as well as partially related in the testimony of the educator. [ 7 ] She is a very intelligent person and can be a very enjoyable person. The problem is that from one day to another, her behaviour and attitude is totally unpredictable. [ 8 ] The mother wishes the reintegration of her daughter. She is a single mother with three other children and needs her daughter. [ 9 ] The psychological assessment contains information that reveals a very difficult past for the teenager and a very fragile personality.

Physically and emotionally abused by the mother over the years.

Rejection and abandonment would have left scars in the mother-daughter relation. [ 10 ] For the psychologist, her behaviour and attitude suggest that the teenager shows a rapid cycle of mood deregulation that is easily triggered by the social environment, regardless of whether the environment is the group home or her home, or whether it is family members or peers (page 5, second paragraph). [ 11 ] The report contains information and clinical impressions that strongly suggest the need for a psychiatric evaluation, in order to determine the possibility or necessity of medication.

For the psychologist, the mother's participation in the measures or treatment envisaged is of the outmost importance and cannot be bypassed. It is not evident from the mother's testimony that she is conscious of the serious psychological state of her daughter. [ 12 ] At this point in time, the evidence convinces the Court that the teenager cannot reintegrate her maternal environment. The Court is also convinced that a psychiatric assessment is necessary.

The behaviour and attitude of the teenager are serious, disturbing at dangerous for her and others. [ 13 ] The services necessitated by her state are urgent. [ 14 ] A period of six (6) months in a rehabilitation centre should permit the delivery of specific and specialized services. Should also be monitored the telephone contacts with the mother not only the visits.

Indeed, according to the psychological report, telephone contacts between the mother and her daughter would be followed by emotional instability for the teenager. [ 15 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS the demand; [ 17 ] MAINTAINS the security and development of the child in danger; [ 18 ] EXTENDS the decision rendered on February 8, 2011, in the following manner and in accordance with

section 91 of the Law:

a) the foster care of the child in a rehabilitation centre, for a period of six (6) months, starting on June 14 , 2011;

b) that a person working for an organism or establishment provide aid, counsel and assistance to the mother and the child, during the foster care measures;

c) that the following health service be provided to the child, within thirty (30) days following the judgment: psychiatric assessment and follow-up if deemed necessary and as long as determined, by the professional;

d) that the mother collaborate and participate in the measures proposed to correct the situation, namely any measure proposed by the psychiatrist or psychologist; [ 19 ] ORDERS that access and visitation rights between the mother and the child be exercised under the supervision of the Director of Youth Protection and according to the recommendations of the psychologist or psychiatrist; [ 20 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate in the execution of the foster care measure if requested to do so, by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 21 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection, for the purpose of executing he measures ordered by the Court. __________________________________ DANIEL BÉDARD, J.C.Q.

Me Jean-Claude Latraverse Lawyer for the child Me Alexandre Cimon Lawyer for the D.Y.P.

Me Sarah Plamondon Lawyer of the mother Date of hearing: June 14, 2011