2012 QCCQ 11166, 2012 QCCQ 11166

Protection de la jeunesse — 123688 2012 QCCQ 11166 JC0B11 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] LOCALITY [ … ] Youth Court Division No: 760-41-004051-119 DATE: March 9, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X Born : [ … ] , 1997 THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION OF LE CENTRE DE JEUNESSE A Petitioner -and- A -and- B Parents of the child ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ CAUTION : The Youth Protection Act provides that within the framework of this Act, no person may publish or broadcast information allowing a child or the child's parents to be identified.

Whomsoever contravenes this

article is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine [articles 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.]. [ 1 ] A motion for revision of a Court decision is submitted to the court concerning X, born [ … ] , 1997.

[ 2 ] The motion alleges that the situation of the child justifies a revision of the judgment pronounced on October 5, 2011 by Justice Linda Despots of the Court of Québec, Youth Division, for the reasons detailed in paragraph 4 of the said motion. [ 3 ] The Petitioner recommends that the adolescent be maintained with her mother and that the family receive aid, counselling and assistance for 6 months.

The Petitioner produces the reports on the analysis of the child's social situation as evidence (pièces D-3 et D- 4), in lieu of testimony and this, by consent. [ 4 ] The father is of unknown address and the Court dispensed service. The admissions of the parties as to the motion are noted in the Court record and they indicate their assent as to the measures proposed by the Director. [ 5 ] Following a provisional period of placement (3 months), the last judgment provides a return of the adolescent to the care of her mother, with other measures of aid, counselling and assistance for 6 months.

The initial placement of the adolescent is justified by behavioural problems, namely a refusal to respect parental authority, drug consumption, self-mutilation, delinquency and aggressiveness. The intervention permits an overall improvement permitting the reintegration on the final measures. [ 6 ] Notwithstanding the measures put in place, the situation rapidly degenerates anew. X resumes her drug consumption (pot, cocaine) and ceases taking her ADD medication. Conflicts arise with her mother and her stepfather.

On November 21, she is hospitalized after a violent outburst at home, wherein she self-mutilates herself. [ 7 ] Although the services of an educator are put in place, there is no improvement. [ 8 ] The mother is overwhelmed by the recurrence of the adolescent's behaviours. The adolescent is provisionally placed in a reception center in January 2012. [ 9 ] X is able to recognize the issues that need to be addressed and the efforts that must be put forth to ensure the success of a return home. Particularly, she needs to receive counselling for her drug problem and understand her behavioural triggers.

The mother also needs to address the issue of appropriate communication and coherent structure. [ 10 ] The Court is convinced that with specific measures reflecting the services and steps which have been targeted and agreed upon by the parties, it is appropriate that the adolescent return to her family environment. [ 11 ] The parties agree that it is necessary to prolong the intervention of the Director of Youth Protection, in order to ensure the continuation of services and address the ongoing issues, which still affect the security and the development of the adolescent. [ 12 ] The Court determines that the security and the development of the adolescent are still in danger and that the recommendations forwarded by the Director of Youth Protection are appropriate and in her best interests. [ 13 ] For all these reasons, the Court: [ 14 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 15 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the adolescent X are still in danger; [ 16 ] REVISES and EXTENDS the decision rendered on October 5, 2011; [ 17 ] ENTRUSTS the adolescent to her mother; [ 18 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counseling or assistance to the adolescent and her family for 6 months; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and her mother take an active

part in the application of the measures; [ 20 ] TAKES ACT that the adolescent will remain in contact with the social worker at her high school, namely School A; [ 21 ] TAKES ACT that the adolescent consents to and will participate fully in a follow up offered by the Pavilion B to address her consumption problem; [ 22 ] TAKES ACT that the adolescent agrees to meet regularly with the educator and her worker from the centre de jeunesse A ; [ 23 ] TAKES ACT that the adolescent will register herself in a sport or other organized activity, and this, within two weeks of the present judgment, and will maintain her participation in said activity; [ 24 ] TAKES ACT that the adolescent agrees to get involved in a psychotherapy with a psychologist; [ 25 ] TAKES ACT that the adolescent and her mother will maintain their involvement in Family Ties workshops offered by A Services, as long as deemed necessary by the parties; [ 26 ] ALL the measures for six (6) months; [ 27 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection of Le centre de jeunesse A for the execution of the measures;

__________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Caterine Caron Attorney for the Director Me Annie Girard Attorney for the child Date of hearing: March 9, 2012