2013 QCCQ 9331, 2013 QCCQ 9331

Protection de la jeunesse — 132607 2013 QCCQ 9331 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] Youth Division Nos.: 615-41-001621-118 and 615-41-001622-116 DATE: June 11, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 2009 Y, born on […], 2007 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], social worker, exercising his profession at the Centre jeunesse A, having a place of business at […], in City A, District A, […] Applicant and A, residing and domiciled at […], in City B, District A, […] Mother and B, residing and domiciled at […], in City B, District A, […] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ( section 95 (2) , Youth Protection Act , R.S.Q. , c.

P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Court is seized with two motions to extend the decisions rendered on June 14, 2012 concerning the situations of Y, 5 years old, and X, 4 years old, Children A. The petitioner asks the prolongation of the children's placement with their paternal grandmother for a period of six months. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the children are represented by Mtre. Sylvie Gourd and Mtre. Valérie Martel assists the petitioner. The parents are present and the mother is assisted by Mtre.

Mylène Grondin. [ 3 ] The parents admit most of the allegations and agree with the recommendations. The evidence is completed with the testimonies of the father and the social worker, the revision reports and the reports from A Center. [ 4 ] From the analysis of all the evidence, it is proven that the parents are not yet ready to assume their children. [ 5 ] The mother was evicted from her Apartement A last August, and since, the parents have been unstable.

Also, they had been through some separations and reconciliations. [ 6 ] For the first six months, the parents neglected to follow the last Court order. [ 7 ] Last January 27, 2013, the mother attended a detoxification therapy and ended it eight days before the end. She is receiving an after care plan from the B Center. She also asks for individual counselling from the Mental Health Services last April, but she is still on a waiting list. [ 8 ] Last April 9, the father attended a detoxification therapy in Orgnanism A for six weeks. He receives an after care plan from the B Center with Mrs [social worker 2].

He also attends AA meetings and meets with the social worker. [ 9 ] Considering that the parents were late to ask for the services needed, they are not yet in position to assume their children. [ 10 ] They will move in their new apartment next June, and in July, the mother will give birth to her third child. [ 11 ] The father wants to attend an anger management therapy and both parents want to receive conjugal therapy adding to their post- therapy follow-up for detoxification. [ 12 ] The children are well taken care of by their grandmother. Both need specific follow-ups. Y meets Dr.

Jacques, a neurologist, for an ADHD with dysphasia. He might have a certain form of autism. It will be clarified over the next year. He also needs services of a

speech therapist because of his severe delay in language comprehension and production. [ 13 ] X is attending daycare and is less aggressive. [ 14 ] Those children are very vulnerable and need attentive parents. They must live in a secure and a stable environment with a lot of stimulation. They need parents or adults who will prioritize their needs. [ 15 ] If the parents fail to collaborate and modify their way of life in the next six months, the Director of Youth Protection might have to elaborate a life project for the children.

The parents are well aware of the possible consequences for their children if they do not collaborate, and now, they express their motivation to collaborate. [ 16 ] CONSEQUENTLY, FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 17 ] GRANTS the petitions; [ 18 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X and Y are still in danger; [ 19 ] ENTRUSTS X and Y to their paternal grandmother, Mrs. C, for a period of six months; [ 20 ] ORDERS Mr.

B to attend an anger management therapy; [ 21 ] ORDERS the parents to attend a post-therapy follow-up for their addiction problems; [ 22 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to supervise all the visit rights and access of the parents with the children and AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to make unannounced visits at the parents' place during the visits and the reintegration; [ 23 ] TAKES notice of the parents' consent that the professionals providing them services communicate information concerning their situation's evolution to the social worker; [ 24 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counselling and assistance to the children and their parents for a period of one year; [ 25 ] ENTRUSTS the children's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing this judgment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Mtre. Valérie Martel, attorney for the applicant Mtre. Mylène Grondin, attorney for the mother Mtre. Sylvie Gourd, attorney for the children Date of hearing: May 22, 2013