2017 QCCQ 6896, 2017 QCCQ 6896

Protection de la jeunesse — 173109 2017 QCCQ 6896 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-0 32184-178 Date: April 27, 2017 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on [...], 2007 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A Applicant -and- A , the mother -and- B , the father The parents JUDGMENT

Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act (L.R.Q., c. P-34.1 ) 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 ] JD2620 The Court hereby confirms and provides written reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of April 27, 2017, in accordance with the provisions of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act [1] . [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection A filed an Application to declare that the security or development of a child is in danger in the case of X , a nine year-old child, based on the neglect to which she is exposed and because of her serious behavioural disturbances. [ 3 ] The facts alleged in support of the application dated February 1, 2017 are as follows: 3.1. as relevant background information, an Agreement on Voluntary Measures was signed for the child on April 28, 2016 for concerns of neglect and behavioral disturbances, as it appears from the said agreement; 3.2. as relevant background information, the mother is not involved in the child’s life; 3.3. the child behaves in such a way as to repeatedly or seriously undermine his (sic) physical or psychological integrity and the parents fail to take the necessary steps to put end to the situation, more particularly but not restrictively in that:

a) in September 2016, the child started a fire at home because she was “bored”;

b) in October 2016, an incident was reported by the school where the child was hyperactive, left the classroom and swore at her teacher;

c) in November 2016, the child was in crisis in the school bus, screaming and not listening;

d) on another occasion, the child threw a chair at another student and was suspended;

e) later that month, the child hit another student twice and cursed at her teacher;

f) the child often lies at school or at home and has a tendency to be manipulative;

g) he child is always restless in class, is very impulsive and has trouble concentrating;

h) the child associates with negative and older peers; 3.4. the parents are failing to provide the child with the appropriate supervision or support, more particularly but not restrictively in that:

a) in March 2015, the child was assessed psychologically and recommendations are to the effect that the child be evaluated for a possible Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

b) the father has not followed up on the recommendation;

c) the child’s need for stimulating activities is neglected;

d) the father has a very hard and rigid discipline style and consequently has difficulties imposing an appropriate consequence when the child misbehaves;

e) the child appears frightened by the father;

f) the father has used physical discipline in the past (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 4 ] In light of the foregoing, the Director recommends that the child be entrusted to the care of her father with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, for a period of six months. [ 5 ] The mother, though duly informed of the proceedings, failed to appear without any explanation and the Court proceeded in her absence. [ 6 ] The father, assisted by Me Stah, admitted the majority of the facts alleged and consented to the proposed measures. [ 7 ] Me Marceau, on behalf of the child, made no admissions but approved of the measures proposed by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 8 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-1 to D-5 as evidence: D-1: Birth certificate; D-2: Court Report, written by [Social Worker 1], dated November 17, 2016; D-3: Voluntary measures agreement; D-4: Addendum, written by [Social Worker 1], dated April 19, 2017; D-5: Educator

Summary Report, writeen by [Social Worker 2], dated April 12, 2017. [ 9 ] The father filed Exhibit P-1: P-1: Bilan comportemental regarding the child, written Mr. [Social Worker 3], specialised educator, dated April 2017. [ 10 ] In

summary, the majority of the alleged facts are admitted. However, the father adds that his daughter is no longer fearful of him and that they are able to communicate much more effectively than in the past. He claims that the last time he physically disciplined her was two years ago. [ 11 ] The documentary evidence he produced confirms significant progress in the child’s behavior, including as a result of the father’s close collaboration with the child’s school: X est une fille réactive. Lorsqu’elle vit une frustration et que la colère se fait sentir, elle peut démontrer de l’agressivité verbale et physique.

Elle peut aussi insulter les intervenants en autorité. X peut exprimer ce qu’elle vit par des gestes d’agressivité tels que : lancer des objets, frapper dans le mobilier, renverser des bureaux. C’est la deuxième année que X fréquente le Centre d’intégration scolaire. Nous avons observé une amélioration au niveau de son contrôle . Tous les comportements décrits plus haut sont plus adéquats . Nous considérons que X fait de plus en plus confiance aux intervenants scolaires. X semble bien évoluer dans un milieu encadrant, structuré et chaleureux. C’est ce que notre école peut lui apporter.

Les progrès de X ne sont pas étrangers à la collaboration de son père . Monsieur B collabore très bien avec l’école . Nous avons établi un système téléphonique quotidien qui permet d’assurer un meilleur suivi entre l’école et la maison [2] (emphasis added). [ 12 ] Signs of improvement were also noted by the educator assigned to work with the family: There has been a marked improvement with X. There has not been a school related incident since November 2016. Mr. B has been able to maintain the gains he has made regarding how he addresses discipline. It was recommended to Mr.

B to continue to recognize X’s emotional needs, and for X to trust Mr. B. This worker ended service on April 07, 2017 with the family. [3] [ 13 ] However, the father must remain very vigilant to ensure that the child’s physical and emotional needs are met to avoid any deterioration in her behavior. [ 14 ] She is a very energetic child for whom it appears to be especially important to engage in physical activities such as organized

sports and other structured, stimulating activities. [ 15 ] As summarized the Addendum to the Court Report: Gains have been made in this period. Mr. B appears to understand X’s need for stimulation and has taken some steps to ensure that she is engaged in physical activities somewhat regularly. [4] […] Despite the above, concerns remain that Mr. B is not always able to prioritize X’s need for emotional connection as well as physical and mental stimulation. Therefore X may be lonely and bored much of the time.

Continued lack of support in these areas could very well lead to more serious delinquent behaviors as she develops into adolescence. [5] [ 16 ] In addition, symptoms associated with ADHD should also continue to be closely monitored: […] in January 2017 Mr. B reportedly brought X to see Dr. Katz and he was given a referral to have her assessed for ADHD by the CLSC. According to Mr. B Dr. Katz did not want to prescribe medications given X’s recent improvement in behavior. Dr. Katz also wanted to have a copy of X’s next report card.

The undersigned did not have an update at the time of writing this report. [6] [ 17 ] Finally, regarding the child’s mother, she is strongly encouraged to be as present and consistent in her contacts with the child as possible. [ 18 ] Consequently, given the admissions and consent expressed by the parties, the Court is satisfied that the application is well- founded and that the measures are in the child's interest. THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 19 ] GRANTS the application; [ 20 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child, X , are in danger under sections 38 (b) (1) (ii) and 38 (

f) of the Youth Protection Act ; AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE CHILD'S INTEREST TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 21 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to the care of her father; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the father ensure that the child is not subjected to any form of verbal or physical aggression; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the child and her mother be determined by consent between the parties TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE that the father insists on the importance for the mother to be consistent and reliable in her contacts with the child; [ 24 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the father ensure that the child is regularly attending extra-curricular activities, more particularly organized sports and summer camp; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the family continue to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection, and the child’s school; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the father ensure that all of the child’s health care needs are met, including following up with her paediatrician’s recommendations including having her assessed for ADHD TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE that measures are underway; [ 27 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE of the father’s testimony to effect that the child benefits from outings with her “big sister” [centre A] volunteer and that steps are being taken to try and ensure that the child continue to benefit from such contacts; [ 28 ] ORDERS that a person working for [centre A] provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her family; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X, to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A , who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 30 ] THE WHOLE for a period of six months.

TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J.

Me Edith Zavodni Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Laurence Marceau Attorney for the child Me Lilian Stah Attorney for the father TD/vl