2019 QCCQ 15280, 2019 QCCQ 15280

Protection de la jeunesse — 1910410 2019 QCCQ 15280 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-002245-188 DATE: January 17, 2019 (written judgment rendered September 20, 2019) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2001 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...] Applicant and A, residing and domiciled at [...] Mother and B, deceased Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 38 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 declare that the security and development of the adolescent X, born on [...], 2001, are endangered under

section 38 (f) [1] of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The mother is present and represented by Me Lazarov. She admits most of the facts, and she agrees with the measures. [ 3 ] X, who is 17 years, old is present and represented by Me Martineau. He admits some of the allegations, and he agrees with the measures. His lawyer requests that a full medical evaluation is performed including a close follow-up, and that the recommendations be made, the meeting with a psychologist is facilitated, including the follow-up until he turns 18 and a recommendation that he remains at [Centre A] where he is right now.

Facts [ 4 ] X was traditionally adopted by his paternal grandparents after his biological mother committed suicide when he was 1 or 2 years old. His maternal biological family comes from City A, and his paternal family comes from City B. [ 5 ] The situation of X was reported to the DYP on November 12, 2018. Three days before, the police had to intervene while X was intoxicated. He cut his wrist in front of the police officer who brought him to the hospital. He was then medevaced to Puvirnituq considering his serious injuries.

The same day, as the suicidal risk was lower, he was authorized to leave the hospital and he asked to go to City A with his maternal grandfather. [ 6 ] When he left the hospital, the doctor said that X was not in danger, but had an important potential of auto aggressiveness and dangerousness for others. He is not able to deal with his emotions. [ 7 ] Despite his desire to go to City A, it was not possible for him to go there as he threatened to kill his family members. No one would like to foster him including his father.

X threatened to commit suicide if he is transferred to City B and doing so, he stayed at the transit. [ 8 ] On November 12, 2018, receiving this report and making some investigation, the DYP learned that X committed many criminal offences in City A. The Court asked why the Director of Youth Protection, as provincial director for the application of the YCJA, was not aware of those criminal offences committed in such a small community. The worker admitted that there was a lack of services and of communication between the two services. [ 9 ] On November 15, 2018, X was entrusted to [Unit A] in City C.

He disagrees with this decision, but stayed calm. [ 10 ] On the same date, the DYP worker met with the biological maternal grandparents and two aunts in City A. The grandmother

showed signs of dementia. They explained that X was in City A since the spring 2018. He sometimes stayed at his grandparent’s, sometimes at his aunt’s and sometimes with friends. Between 2013 and 2018, X made several trips between City B and City A. The last years he went less frequently to City B. One of his aunts suspected that he comes in City A because his father does not really take care of him and has alcohol consumption issues.

The family members confirm that they do not feel safe in X’s presence. [ 11 ] On November 19, 2018, the undersigned rendered a provisional measure and entrusted X to a rehabilitation centre and ordered a psychological and psychiatric assessment within a maximal two months. [ 12 ] The beginning of the placement was difficult, but he finished adapting and collaborated well. On December 10, 2018, the close unit staff considering him able to entrust a more open unit. [ 13 ] The DYP worker does not know if X ever received a full medical evaluation.

She knows that he saw a doctor when he was medevaced to Puvirnituq and a dentist appointment is planned shortly. [ 14 ] As ordered, Dr. Beltempo met with the youth and as the written report was not ready, he communicated his conclusions and recommendations verbally to the worker. The psychologist mentions that: According to the first meeting, the youth is in complete deny of everything. He sees himself as a victim. He said that he never had problems with the police even if he has been involved with YCJA since 2016. He has no insight. The youth was not able to explain the event when he cut his throat. Dr.

Beltempo confirmed that the youth is not suicidal at the moment. They also discussed about his heavy past. According to Dr. Beltempo, the youth has a profile of a young offender and will need consequences for his actions. According to him, he does not believe that X having Christmas visit in his community will be good at the moment. According to Dr. Beltempo, the suicidal ideation are related to his depression which is denied by X. [ 15 ] Dr. Larose, the child psychiatrist is not able to meet with X before the end of January 2019 in Puvirnituq.

The Court asked why this meeting should take place in Puvirnituq considering the psychiatrist works in City C and X is also in City C. The worker explained that she waits for the decision to know where X will live before booking an appointment. [ 16 ] One of the maternal aunts told the DYP that she wants the best for him and would appreciate having news from time to time. If he is entrusted to the Group Home in City A, she will go to visit him, but no one of the family members want to receive him at their place.

If he is in City A, she wants him to leave the community as soon as he turns 18. [ 17 ] The adoptive mother was met on December 14, 2018. She is very concerned by X’s well-being. When he was 14 years old, she stopped him five times while he was attempting to commit suicide. She knows that he is jealous of the other adolescents who have a mother. She considers that there is no adapted resources for him in the community. [ 18 ] In 2007, as he was 6 years old, X was diagnosed with ADHD.

He did not take his medication as the father disagreed with. [ 19 ] According to the adoptive mother, the biological mother consumed alcohol during her pregnancy. After she committed suicide, the father did not take care of him, and her husband and she adopted him. Mostly the grandfather took care of him and X was very attached to him. Sadly, the grandfather deceased in 2008, when X was 7 years old. The grandmother continued to assume her grandson. [ 20 ] In 2009, X met with a child psychiatrist because he was very aggressive and was disturbing a lot.

The psychiatrist concluded that he suffered from an opposition defiant disorder and the DYP worker’s report confirmed that he never received the appropriate services. [ 21 ] In 2013, the father received a two-year jail sentence. At that moment, the grandmother became overwhelmed and asked the maternal grandparents to help her. [ 22 ] The DYP record shows that the situation of X was already reported in October 2015. He went in City C with his father, but this later gets intoxicated and aggressive and X had nowhere to go.

The facts were considered as founded, but X’s situation was not considered in danger. [ 23 ] During the spring 2018, after his arrival in City A, X tried to commit suicide another time. [ 24 ] Regarding the adoptive mother, the Court asked the DYP worker to clarify her position because she wrote three different things in her report. She mentioned that the mother demonstrated to be able to look for services. But she also said that she does not know the services available and finally that the services are available, but the family refused it.

The worker answered that she did not speak about that with the mother, but regarding the family in City A, she knows that they decided to keep secret the two suicidal attempts. [ 25 ] During this evaluation, the DYP learned that X is not going to school for a while. Questioning about the period since when X is not going to school, the DYP worker said not being aware.

The only information available is the psychiatrist evaluation made in 2009, in which it’s mentioned that, at that time, he was already not going to school. [ 26 ] Considering the age of X, the DYP worker already think about the reintegration which should take place before he turns 18. Before that, the DYP worker would like him to stay in [Centre A] where he is actually because he answers well to the program. X also wishes to stay there.

The decision will be made by [Centre B], and for now it’s not done yet. [ 27 ] Before the reintegration in City B, the worker would like to evaluate the type of resources available in the community to foster him and also, it will depend on his behaviour in the unit. [ 28 ] The report was written on December 23, 2018, and since that date, the situation was stable until the last week, when he attempted three times to his life.

Analysis [ 29 ] The evidence is obvious, and everyone agrees, that the security and development of X are endangered under

section 38

f) of the YPA. X made multiple suicidal attempts and continue to have suicidal ideation. He put himself at risk. [ 30 ] Dr. Beltempo concluded that X suffers from depression which could be easily explained by the loss of his mother and of his grandfather (adoptive father), two significant persons in his life, and a very difficult background. [ 31 ] He is also putting him at risk by his acting out and his numerous criminal offences. Actually X is not going to school nor working and he is unable to project himself in the future.

He is suffering a lot. [ 32 ] The Court agrees with the recommended measures, but is disappointed that such an application as not filed before. The maternal and the paternal family should be blamed because they did not take steps to protect X as soon as he needed it. [ 33 ] When he was only 8 years old, he was diagnosed with ADHD, ODD and learning difficulties. At that time, he was not going to school regularly. It was necessary at that time to request help for him.

The first parents’ responsibility is to protect their children. [ 34 ] When the parents do not fulfill their responsibilities and the school is aware of the situation, it’s the responsibility of the school to alert the authorities as the DYP. That was not done. [ 35 ] The Court is also concerned by the follow-up done by the DYP in this file. For sure, the DYP was supposed to be informed of the situation by the family and at least by the school. That being said, the DYP also had opportunity to be aware of X’s situation by another way.

X was followed by the Provincial Director because of criminal offences, which occurred in City A and in City B, two small villages where the information circulate very quickly. [ 36 ] Doing so, the responsibility of such a serious situation is shared between the family, the school and the DYP. Today X is the victim of this blindness. Fortunately, he accepts to receive the services and the Court will order that those services be offered intensively.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 37 ] GRANTS the application; [ 38 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the youth X, born on [...], 2001, are endangered under

section 38 (

f) of the Youth Protection Act, which is serious behavioural disturbance; [ 39 ] ORDERS that youth be entrusted to an institution operating a rehabilitation centre, chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre; [ 40 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that he be entrusted at [Centre A ] where he is entrusted actually; [ 41 ] AUTHORIZES the youth’s reintegration with the mother if the situation allows it; [ 42 ] ORDERS that the youth and the mother take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 43 ] ORDERS that the youth and the mother report at regular intervals to the Director of Youth Protection to inform him about the current situation; [ 44 ] ORDERS that the youth receive specific health care and services required by his situation; [ 45 ] ORDERS that the psychological assessment be finalized and provided to X; [ 46 ] ORDERS that a child’s psychiatric evaluation be performed as soon as possible; [ 47 ] ORDERS that all the recommendations of the psychological and psychiatric evaluations be followed; [ 48 ] ORDERS that a drug and alcohol assessment be performed and all the recommendations be followed; [ 49 ] ORDERS that a full medical evaluation of X be performed; [ 50 ] ORDERS that the Director of Youth Protection facilitate the access for X to a psychologist; [ 51 ] ORDERS that the terms, the frequency and the modalities of the contacts between X and his mother are facilitated and determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 52 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counsel and assistance to youth and the family; [ 53 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth X , to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 54 ] ORDERS the execution of the present judgment by any peace officer; [ 55 ] RECOMMENDS to the Commission des Droits de la Personne et des Droits de la Jeunesse to do an investigation in this file and INVITES the Commission to make any other recommendations; [ 56 ] ORDERS the clerk of the Court of Quebec, Youth Division to notify this decision to the Commission des Droits de la Personne

et des Droits de la Jeunesse; [ 57 ] THE WHOLE until [...], 2019. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q. Me Sarah Bourgeois-Lessard, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Isabelle Martineau, attorney for the youth Me Ivan Lazarov, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: January 17, 2019