2018 QCCQ 14873, 2018 QCCQ 14873

Protection de la jeunesse — 185455 2018 QCCQ 14873 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] COMMUNITY OF […] Youth Division No: 640-41-001201-091 DATE: July 9, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE RENÉE LEMOINE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 2009 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of A Applicant v.

A , residing and domiciled at […] Mother and B , residing and domiciled at […] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (sections 95(2) and 75 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcast of information allowing for a child or the child’s parents to be identified.

Every person who contravenes this provision is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine (ss. 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A .). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection of A asks the Court to review the decision rendered by Honourable Louis Grégoire on June 12, 2017. [ 2 ] The last order entrusted the child to a foster family until June 12, 2018. He was entrusted to Ms. C, the foster mother sister’s. [ 3 ] On June 7, 2011, the child was placed in the foster care of Ms. D and Mr.

E until the age of majority. [ 4 ] In April 2017, the Director of Youth Protection asked to change the foster family due to several significant personal issues affecting the foster mother such as alcohol and drug abuse and fragile mental health. The foster father was incarcerated for sexual assault against an adult. [ 5 ] During the period of placement at Ms. C’s home, the child indicated that he was missing his foster parents. They are significant parental figures for him. [ 6 ] On August 12, 2017, the foster father, Mr. E, returned to Town A after he was released from jail.

Shortly after his arrival, he met with the applicant to take custody of the child. The applicant asked him to show that he can provide a stable and safe environment. [ 7 ] Between August and December 2017, both previous foster parents worked on their personal issues. Despite their willingness to resolve their issues, Ms. D displayed behavioural issues. She had suicidal ideation and met with social services two to three times a week. She has serious behavioural problems. [ 8 ] In December 2017, the child wanted to be with his previous foster parents for the Christmas holidays.

Overall the visit went very well, except for the evening before the child had to leave. Ms. D broke a window in the social services office. [ 9 ] The return of the child to Town B to be with his foster family Ms. C was very hard for him. He missed Ms. D and Mr. E a great deal. Considering the child’s strong bond with his previous foster family, the applicant decided to assess the possibility of returning the child to them. [ 10 ] The assessment shows an important commitment from the foster father, Mr. E, toward the child.

Even if the child is in another village, he provided food by sending the product of his hunt by cargo shipment. He is involved in his follow-up care with social services. [ 11 ] Both Mr. E and Ms. D meet with social services once a week. Mr. E is the new person responsible for A.A. meetings in his community.

[ 12 ] In January 2018, the applicant informed Mr. E and Ms. D that they had decided to return the child to them. They immediately took steps to register the child at school. They prepared by painting and decorating the child’s room. [ 13 ] On February 7, 2018, the child returned to Mr. E and Ms. D. That same night, Ms. D was arrested at the arena after being disorganised when she saw a new police officer. The child witnessed of the aggressive behaviour of his foster mother toward the people present. Ms. D was incarcerated and sent [...] to be detained. [ 14 ] Mr. E took care of the child after the event.

The applicant’s home visits confirmed that Mr. E takes very good care of the child. He was happy, was properly dressed and had good hygiene. He attended school and Mr. E intervened positively with the school authority to resolve a bullying issue for the child. [ 15 ] Mr. E cooperates well, and he is honest and transparent with the Director of Youth Protection workers. [ 16 ] On April 4, 2018, another serious event occurred involving Ms. D. She was arrested because she walked around in the village with a knife. She was seriously injured during the police intervention and was medevaced to Town C.

She is still in the hospital in Town C receiving care for physical injuries. [ 17 ] Despite this event, the applicant takes the position that the child should be left in the care of Mr. E. She recognizes the concerns about the behaviour and mental health of Ms. D but she considers Mr. E to be a very protective caregiver for the child. [ 18 ] The main consideration is the child’s strong bond with this foster family. For him, they are his parents. The child is affected by Ms. D’s situation because he is sad and worried for her. According Ms. [social worker 1]’s evaluation, the applicant feels very secure with Mr.

E despite these events. [ 19 ] The Court considers that the foster mother condition must be taken very seriously and closely monitored by the Director of Youth Protection. The child’s mother expressed her worries and asks that her child’s foster family be changed.

She must be reassured by the involvement of the Director of Youth Protection and conditions must be put in place to ensure the safety of the child after the foster mother returns to the community. [ 20 ] The Court specifically emphasizes the fragility of the situation and the importance of intensive support for the foster family to ensure that it is a safe environment for the child.

The attachment bond of the child with the foster parents is important, but his need for security is also a great consideration. [ 21 ] Having considered the whole situation of the child, the Court is of the opinion that in the present situation, it is in the best interests of the child to be maintained with Mr. E and Ms. D if she agrees to address her issue and receive the appropriate care for her mental health condition.

FOR THE ABOVEMENTIONED REASONS, THE COURT: [ 22 ] GRANTS this application; [ 23 ] EXTENDS the decision or order rendered on June 12, 2017; [ 24 ] DECLARES that the security or development of X, born on […], 2009, continues to be in danger; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the child’s parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Tribunal; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the child attend a school or another place of learning or participate in a program geared to developing skills and autonomy; [ 28 ] ORDERS that contact between the child and the parents be determined by the Director with respect to the terms, frequency and degree of supervision; [ 29 ] RECOMMENDS that the situation of the foster mother be closely monitored by the Director in order to ensure the security of the child; [ 30 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child, the child’s family and the child’s foster family until […], 2019; [ 31 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate in the execution of the enactment; [ 32 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection of A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ RENÉE LEMOINE, J.C.Q.

Mtre Cassandra Neptune Attorney for the child Mtre Sarah Bourgeois Lessard Attorney for the applicant Mtre Angele Tommasel Attorney for the mother Date of hearing: May 22, 2018