2020 QCCQ 10814, 2020 QCCQ 10814

Protection de la jeunesse — 204110 JL5004 2020 QCCQ 10814 COURT OF QUEBEC « Youth Division » CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] N°: 540-41-005844-195 DATE : JANUARY 17, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE LISA LEROUX, J.C.Q. [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth protection worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, Applicant And X, Born on [...], 2013 Child And A B Parents 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 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.) [ 1 ] On June 7 2019, the Director of youth protection (the Director) received a report stating that the child is at risk of being victim

[ 1 ] On June 7 2019, the Director of youth protection (the Director) received a report stating that the child is at risk of being victim of physical abuse because of her exposure to family violence. [ 2 ] After assessing the situation, the Director considers that the security and the development of the child are in danger for educational neglect. The Director asks the Tribunal to intervene in the family for this reason. He recommends, among other measures, that the child resides with her mother and that a social follow up be provided for a period of one year.

POSITION OF THE PARTIES [ 3 ] The parents consent to the intervention of the Director for the above mentioned reason. They recognise the content of the report and accept the proposed measures. They intend to collaborate with the Director to put an end to the situation of compromission. [ 4 ] The attorney representing the child considers the intervention of the Director justified and the measures in the interest of his client. [ 5 ] The child has an older sister, Y, who is also the subject of a motion for protection for similar reasons.

By consent of all parties, the tribunal conducted a joint investigation for the two children. THE FACTS [ 6 ] Over the past years, the child has been the witness of many conflicts between her older sister Y and her parents. Arguments are frequently escalating in verbal, and sometimes, physical conflicts. [ 7 ] On June 7, 2019, the father poured margarine all over Y while helding her down to her bed. The childs reports to having been scared during that event and went outside in the yard to cry. It is this situation that led the Director to intervene. [ 8 ] Regularly, the father tells Y to leave the house.

That’s exactly what happened on June 7, 2019. However, this time, Y remained at a friend’s place for the entire summer. The child was affected by this situation. [ 9 ] The parents recognise that there are many arguments within the family and that everyone uses vulgar language and screams. They admit not knowing how to react properly during the conflicts. [ 10 ] Another problem arises from the family which is the lack of authority the parents have towards the child.

Both parent aknowledge that they are incoherent when it is time to apply authority. [ 11 ] The child is described as having teenager tendencies and to get mad when she doesn’t have what she wants. She screams, hits, kicks, throws objects and slams doors to express her frustrations. [ 12 ] The mother admits needing help in order to provide a structured living environment to the child. Often, she is to tired to manage the child’s crisis, so she just lets her do what she wants. [ 13 ] The father admits that he doesn’t impose consequences to the child.

He explains that he grew up in a very strict and rigid environment, that’s why he his against rules and consequences. He recognises being stubborn himself and impatient. He now realises that he needs to find other means than screaming and swearing when he intervenes towards the child. [ 14 ] Also, the mother admits that she doesn’t have a routine established for the child. She goes to bed late at night (around 11 – 12 pm) and wakes up at 10 am. As a result, the child missed daycare last year and now, she is not available to learn at school because she is tired all the time.

Also, the child can be left alone for a couple of hours. This happens when her mother leaves for work in the afternoon and her father or sister are not there to supervise her. [ 15 ] The parents are separated since September 2019. Since then, the child lives with the mother and her older sister Y. She visits her father on a regular basis. DECISION [ 16 ] The evidence presented at the hearing allows the tribunal to conclude that the security and the development of the child are in danger for the reason identified by the Director.

Besides, all parties agree. [ 17 ] The conflictual family dynamic has been going on for many years now. The fact that Y now lives exclusively with the mother and refuses to see the father reduces the possibility of family conflicts. However, the parents realise they need support to improve communication with their children. [ 18 ] They admit that their lack of authority over the child is an important issue. The child is only five years old, and yet, she reacts like a teenager and she has tantrums that they are not able to manage properly. The parents are aware that the child already knows how to manipulate them.

Fortunately, they are open to receive services in this regard. [ 19 ] It is also crucial that the parents develop better co-parenting skills. In the interest of the child, the rules and limits should be the same in both homes. [ 20 ] The purpose of the social follow-up that will be offered is also to prevent a deterioration in their relationship with their daughter, as happened with Y. [ 21 ] Consequently, the Tribunal considers that the measures recommended by the Director are in the best interest of the child and that is why it intends to order their application.

[ 22 ] CONSEQUENTLY AND FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE TRIBUNAL : [ 23 ] GRANTS the motion for protection; [ 24 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are in danger under paragraph b) 1) iii) of

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 25 ] ORDERS that X remains with her family and that the child’s parents report periodically to the Director on the measures they apply in their own regard; [ 26 ] ORDERS the child and the child’s parents undertake to take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 27 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the youth and the youth’s family; [ 28 ] THE WHOLE, for a period of 12 months; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the DYP A for the enforcement of this order; February 11, 2020 __________________________________ LISA LEROUX, J.C.Q. This is the written and reasoned version of the oral judgment handed down on January 17, 2020 in accordance with

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act . Mtre. Annie MIELE Counsel for the Directeur de la protection de la jeunesse Mtre. Éric OUELLETTE Counsel for the child A Mother not represented B Father not represented LL/hl