2022 QCCQ 13028, 2022 QCCQ 13028

Protection de la jeunesse — 224354 2022 QCCQ 13028 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] COMMUNITY OF [...] Youth Division No: 614-41-000475-196 DATE: August 17, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...]; Applicant and X, born on [...], 2019; Child and A, Mother and B, Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (sections 95 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 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection A (the Director) asks the Court to review the decision rendered on May 22, 2022, by Honourable François Ste-Marie in the situation of X, 3 years old. [ 2 ] The Director asks to extend the placement of the child in a foster home for nine months, with various services for the parents. [ 3 ] At the hearing the mother is present, represented by Me Marie-Josée Ayoub. The father is absent but represented by Me Justine Bergeron.

Me Fanny Wylde represents the child and Me Adelia Ferreira, the applicant. [ 4 ] The father admits many allegations and agrees with the recommendations. The mother admits few allegations and disagrees. [ 5 ] A revision report is filed. The mother and the community worker, Mrs. [Social Worker 1] testified. [ 6 ] The situation of X is before the Court since October 9, 2019. At that date, his security and development were declared in danger according to

Section 38 b) (1) (

i) and (2) of the YPA . The parents had issues with alcohol and drugs, cocaine for the mother and speeds for the father. [ 7 ] Since, the child’s situation was reviewed three times, on December 2000, in July 2021 and in May 2022. [ 8 ] In the last judgment, Judge Ste-Marie wrote that the mother was still drinking in presence of the child, that the father had a follow-up with a psychotherapist, and that his situation was still the same. He wished to attend therapy in July 2022. The mother refused to take

part in the parental capacity assessment as it was previously ordered since 2019. He mentioned that the parents’ collaboration with the Director was difficult. [ 9 ] He clearly stated at paragraph 21 that the father’s wish to care for the child on a fulltime basis was not supported by the result of his parental capacity assessment. [ 10 ] The child was entrusted to the mother on conditions. [ 11 ] Now the evidence reveals that the child’s situation was reported on June 23, because the mother was aggressively pulling the child by his arm, being rough with him and walking fast when they left the clinic.

The father was present and he asked the mother why she was so rough with X. The mother became impatient and the parents started to argue in his presence. [ 12 ] The child started to cry and asked for his father. While he was attempted to comfort the child, the mother grabbed him and shouted to see a nurse and to confirm he was still alive. At this point the child was in distress. [ 13 ] The mother left the clinic and was again walking fast and grabbing the child.

[ 14 ] When the youth protection workers arrived in front of the mother’s home, she, with the maternal grandmother, started being aggressive toward the youth protection workers. They didn’t let them speak. The mother said she was fed up with the youth protection workers taking the father’s side. The grandmother intervention was also inappropriate. She asked the workers to write down that “she will get drunk and kill the father”. [ 15 ] After being asked to leave, the youth protection workers heard her screaming in the house “come here you” dragging the child towards the front doors.

She was pulling him aggressively. She was yelling “you see he is alive, he is not dead”. The child had both his hands on his ears and his head down. [ 16 ] In the entrance closet of the porch a plate with burned marks, some marijuana residues and burned knives was noted by the youth protection workers.

The grandmother admitted that’s where the mother and herself smoke. [ 17 ] Once informed by the nurse that the child had infection on his arm and the mother had to bring him back to the clinic, the youth protection workers decide to invoke immediate protective measures and police assistance was asked because of the aggressive behaviour of the mother and the grandmother. [ 18 ] The child was placed with the paternal Aunt C.

He is greatly affected by the parent’s conflict. [ 19 ] Since, the youth protection worker received reports that the mother consume alcohol and use drug while the child is under her care. [ 20 ] Adding to this evidence, the mother acknowledges in her testimony that she is depressed, that she consumed alcohol and cocaine on June 17, on August 4 and August 15. She intends to attend treatment online on September 26. She was supposed to start it last Monday but it was too full. [ 21 ] The mother used to sell drugs and alcohol. She did it until her son turn three years old, last [...].

She did it twice since to get enough money to pay her drugs. [ 22 ] The mother did not collaborate with the Director since the child’s placement because she does not understand the reason of the intervention and because she is depressed and needs to sleep. [ 23 ] The same issues were denounced in 2019, the Director had to intervene because the child’s needs were neglected. [ 24 ] Reviewing the mother’s intents with the last judgment, the Court realises that the mother is not credible, always postponing the therapies, treatments, always putting the blame on other persons.

She was not honest and transparent with the Director, she easily hides many problems to the new worker assigned in the present file. [ 25 ] The mother is reluctant towards the Director. She does not trust the workers. She is aggressive towards the father and does not allow the child to care for him. She does not show any real concern for her son. [ 26 ] With this lack of empathy, this agressivity, this medical concern, the mother needs time to seek for services for herself. She is not in position to assume parental custody. [ 27 ] The father’s situation is still problematic.

He cannot assume the child. [ 28 ] The mother has to stabilise her situation and then be evaluated for her parental capacities, as it is recommended since December 2020 and ordered since July 2021. Medical and psychological services are recommended. [ 29 ] Considering the evidence, the comments of the child’s lawyer, the Court has the preponderant evidence the child needs to evoluate in a stable, secure and caring family, for the next nine months.

FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 30 ] GRANTS the application; [ 31 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still endangered; [ 32 ] ORDERS his placement in a foster family for nine months; [ 33 ] ORDERS the Director to supervise all the contacts and visits of the child with his parents as for frequency, duration, presence of a third party and other modalities; [ 34 ] ORDERS the parents to attend treatment for their alcohol and drug consumption and aftercare program as required to maintain their sobriety; [ 35 ] ORDERS the mother to complete a parental assessment; [ 36 ] ORDERS the parents to ensure that the child is not exposed to any forms of violence and/or any verbal aggression; [ 37 ] ORDERS the parents to remain sober in presence of the child; [ 38 ] ORDERS the mother to advise the Director of any change of address of phone number; [ 39 ] ORDERS the Director to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the parents and the child for one year;

[ 40 ] ORDERS any peace officer to collaborate with the execution of the present judgment if the Director asks; [ 41 ] AUTHORIZES the Director to share and obtain information with the service providers working with the parents; [ 42 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director who shall then see that the measures are carried out. Signed on August 29, 2022 __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. Me Adelia Ferreira Adelia Ferreira, avocate For the applicant Me Fanny Wylde Centre communautaire juridique A For the child Me Marie-Josée Ayoub Ayoub Avocats inc For the mother Me Justine Bergeron Yves Ménard Avocats inc. For the father Date of hearing: August 17, 2022