2018 QCCQ 10750, 2018 QCCQ 10750

Protection de la jeunesse — 181066 2018 QCCQ 10750 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] LOCALITY OF […] Youth Protection Division No: 450-41-005552-154 DATE: January 15, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE LISE GAGNON, J.Q.C. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE SITUATION OF THE CHILD : X Born on [...], 2015 [INTERVENANTE 1] , person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre jeunesse du CIUSSS A, working at […]; (Applicant) -and- A ; residing and domiciled at […] -and- B , residing and domiciled at […]; Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________

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 ] The Director of youth protection (DYP) submits to the court an application for revision of a decision rendered May 2, 2017 in which the court entrusted X to his paternal grandparents for a period of one year. [ 2 ] Today, the DYP recommends that X be maintained with his paternal grandparents for a period of one year and to take judicial notice of the DYP’s intention to file an application to declare the child judicially admissible for adoption. [ 3 ] The parents have informed the social worker that they did not intend to come to court. [ 4 ] The attorney for the child agrees with the DYP’s recommendations.

Update of the situation since May 2, 2017 [ 5 ] X has been living with his grandparents for almost 2 years. The grandparents meet X’ needs. X attends day care 5 days a week. He is well integrated and he follows his routine well. [ 6 ] The father now lives in Sutton with his paternal aunt. He says he remains sober. He visits X once a month when he goes to see the grandparents. X does not have negative reactions after the visits. [ 7 ] In July 2017, after a stay at the psychiatric unit, the mother went to live with her father.

However, a few months later, she was arrested and detained for having done several prank calls to the police. And in October, the mother was hospitalized again. [ 8 ] At the end of November, the social worker could meet with the mother and the maternal grandmother. The social worker testifies that the mother was doing better.

However, because the mother’s mental health remains fragile and also because of the negative reactions X has presented in the past after the mother’s visits, the social worker recommends that no contact be allowed between the mother and X. [ 9 ] In fact, X has not seen his mother for nearly a year. [ 10 ] The maternal grand-mother is very supportive of the mother. She also supports the paternal grandparents. She will even babysits X during the paternal grandparents’ holiday [in Country A]. [ 11 ] The maternal grand-mother is aware that her daughter cannot be in contact with X. She is reliable.

Applicable measures [ 12 ] The parents’ situation has not evolved enough in the last 9 months to resume custody of X. [ 13 ] As for the mother, her situation remains fragile and considering X’ negative reaction to his mother’s visit in the past, the Court concludes that it is not in X’ interest to reinstate contact with his mother in the next year. [ 14 ] As for the father, he understands that his son is well taken care of by his parents and he agrees that X remain there. [ 15 ] X is now getting more and more attached to his grandparents, who respond well to his needs. [ 16 ] The parents realize that X is doing well with his paternal grandparents.

At times they agree with the adoption and at other times, they are more reluctant. [ 17 ] The DYP believes that X would benefit from being adopted by his paternal grandparents. This is a life plan that would certainly ensure his stability on a permanent basis. [ 18 ] In the next year, the parents are invited to reflect on what would be in X’ best interest for the future. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: GRANTS the present application; DECLARES that the security and the development of X are in danger;

REVISES the Court order rendered on May 2, 2017; ENTRUSTS X to the Director of Youth Protection for his placement in a foster home, namely the foster family of the child’s paternal grandparents, M. C and Mrs. D, for a one (1) year period; TAKES NOTICE of the Director of Youth Protection’s intention to file an application to declare the child judicially admissible for adoption within the next months; AUTHORISES , in X’s best interest, supervised contacts with his father, according to the modalities established with the Director of Youth Protection; FORBIDS any direct and indirect contacts between X and his mother; ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the measures ordered to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is in danger, namely : -that they participate honestly to the psychosocial follow-up and the actualisation of the intervention plan; -that the they inform the Director or Youth Protection of any changes occurring in their personal situation; -that they participate in any services deemed necessary to resolve their personal problems; ORDERS that a person working for CIUSSS A or any other establishment or body, provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and his family for a period of one (1) year, as of February 9, 2018; ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection to see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ LISE GAGNON, J.Q.C.

Me Marie-Pier Trépanier Youth Protection Counsel Me Céline Gallant Counsel for the Child Date of hearing: January 15 th , 2018 D-10