2018 QCCQ 13800, 2018 QCCQ 13800

Protection de la jeunesse — 1810803 2018 QCCQ 13800 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 635-41-000560-141 DATE: October 29, 2018 (written judgment rendered on January 24, 2019) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2004 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] and [SOCIAL WORKER 2], Youth Protection workers, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...] Applicants and A, deceased Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 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 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) asks the Court to extend the decision rendered on October 31, 2017, regarding X, born on [...], 2004.

At that date, the Court declared the security and development still in danger and ordered that X be entrusted to a rehabilitation centre with a reintegration in a foster family if the situation allows it. [ 2 ] The DYP submits that the reintegration has not been possible and that X still needs to be entrusted to a rehabilitation centre. [ 3 ] X is present and represented by Me Neptune. She admits the alleged facts and she agrees with the measures. Historical situation [ 4 ] It’s important to note that, even being adopted by Ms. A (her maternal grandmother), X was taken care by her biological mother Ms.

B, while the adoptive mother move to City A for medical reasons (dialysis) [1] . [ 5 ] On November 11, 2008 , the situation of X was submitted to the Court. B was taking care of X and her three siblings. B was overwhelmed with her parental responsibilities. It was revealed that when she was intoxicated by drugs and/or alcohol, she was violent towards the children. She was not able to impose routine nor structure at home. Doing so, X and her siblings missed school and daycare. They also suffered from a lack of food, clothes and hygiene.

The Court declared the security and development of the child in danger [2] and maintained her under B’s care for five months. [ 6 ] On August 26, 2009 , the Court noted that after an improvement, the situation of B got bad during the worker’s vacation. She was conscious of her difficulties and willing to resolve her issues. The Court entrusted X in a foster family for a period of three months with aid, counsel and assistance to the family until the end of the school year, June 2010. [ 7 ] On June 9, 2010 , the evidence revealed that the placement was beneficial for X. She was doing very well at school.

B did not go to therapy but as she was pregnant she maintained her sobriety. B was involved in a violent conjugal relationship. The Court entrusted X to her biological mother, Ms. B for a period of six months. [ 8 ] On October 19, 2010 , B was still displaying alcohol consumption issues. She had been arrested for drinking and driving. She had left the children to a babysitter and left for City A for few days. At the time of the hearing, she was at [treatment centre A]. The Court entrusted X to a foster family for a period of six months. The DYP entrusted her in the foster home of Ms. C and Mr.

D in the region of City B. [ 9 ] In November 2010 , the adoptive mother (

A) deceased after a long time illness. [ 10 ] On April 5, 2011 , the Court homologated a draft agreement and entrusted X to the same foster family until the end of the school year. Following these measures, the file was closed. [ 11 ] While X was living with her biological mother, B, and her spouse, the DYP retained few reports between November 2012 and

June 2013 in regards of risk of neglect, psychological ill-treatment and neglect with regard to basic physical needs. In August 2013, after the evaluation process the DYP considered the situation of X in danger in regards with neglect (basic needs and supervision). [ 12 ] On August 15, 2013 , a voluntary measure was signed and X was entrusted to her biological mother (

B) for one year. [ 13 ] In October 2013 , the biological mother (

B) was detained. X and her siblings were entrusted to their aunt E. [ 14 ] On January 5, 2014 , the biological mother was released from detention but she stayed living in City A. According to the DYP, she was homeless. [ 15 ] On March 21, 2014 , the aunt, E, also left for City A leaving X and her sibling to their uncle who suffered from a mental illness. [ 16 ] On March 24, 2014 , X was entrusted to a foster family under immediate protective measures which were extended after [ 17 ] On August 7, 2014 , the mother, B was still nowhere to be founded.

X who was 10 years old was entrusted to a foster family in City A in June 2014. She knew that her mother was living in City A and she was convinced that she had her own house. She wished to live with her. The Court declared that the security and development of X were in danger [3] and entrusted her to a foster family for a period of one year. [ 18 ] On September 15, 2015 , X was in the foster family of Ms. F since the last court order. The mother had no contact with her daughter nor with the DYP. The Court entrusted X to a foster family, namely Ms.

F until she reaches her majority. [ 19 ] On April 16, 2018 , the Court was seized with the revision of the situation. X had run away from her foster family and left with a man. She was founded intoxicated, she had to be hospitalized and she was entrusted to a rehabilitation centre under provisional measures in February 2018. The evidence revealed that X was not feeling well in her foster family and that she needed more structure. The Court entrusted X to a rehabilitation centre and authorized the child’s reintegration in a foster family if the situation allows it.

Facts [ 20 ] On April 17, 2018, following the court hearing in City C, a visit between X and her sister was organized. She was very happy to have this opportunity but two days after she called the emergency line saying that she is feeling homesick and that her life down South was not worth living. Because of that she was entrusted to an intensive unit. [ 21 ] On May 14, 2018, X ran away from the unit and was found on May 30, 2018, in a 38 years-old-man’s place. She declared having been physically and sexually assaulted by him.

She was transferred to a locked unit. [ 22 ] After her stay at the locked unit, she was transferred to [Unit A]. Everything went well until July 15, 2018, when she tried to run away another time. She admitted feeling suicidal and was put on Level 2 suicide watch. In the same day, she ran away with another youth. She was found few hours after and returned to Level 2 suicide watch until July 23, 2018. [ 23 ] The evidence reveals that X has been cutting herself frequently and regularly since she has been at [Unit A]. Sometimes it’s because of anxiety and sometimes it’s for unexplained reason.

She is followed by an art therapist once a week to help her with this issue. [ 24 ] X has some visits at the rehabilitation centre. Ms. F (foster mother) and her cousin, Y also entrusted to Ms. F, come to see her sometimes. X also went for a visit at Ms. F’s place. During that visit, she expresses not willing to go back to the rehabilitation centre and ran away. She was found a few days later and sent back to the unit. [ 25 ] The revision report mentions that: X has repeatedly expressed that she wishes to return to the North, to be with her extended family members and to experience more of her culture.

Upon questioning she explains that she is not sure if she would like to return to the care of Ms. F. However she cannot give any reasons why. [ 26 ] X frequently expresses the desire to connect with her biological mother and with her culture. She ran away in City A with the objective to find her mother. The DYP worker explains that he understands the situation and will help her to locate her mother in a safe way. He would like to go with her in the street and to use this time to explain to her the danger.

She also had to be prepared for the fact that maybe she won’t find her mother as in her dreams. [ 27 ] Since the last order, X maintains the same desire to go back to the North. She misses her family member a lot. The DYP had found a foster family who should receive X for visits but this foster family was closed, so it was not possible to organize it. X also asks to go to her uncle, but the DYP refused because he is living in another village. The worker has somebody else in mind, not in the extended family, but this option has to be considered.

For now, it’s not done yet, so she was not able to benefit from the three or four visits generally offered to children entrusted down South. [ 28 ] The perspective is still to entrust X to Ms. F after the rehabilitation centre. The last communication between Ms. F and the DYP worker was in July. She was available to have X back under her care at that time and she should be still available. A collaboration with [centre A]’s worker will be needed to work in the relation between X and Ms. F. According to the DYP worker, to be able to proceed with the reintegration, we should understand why X is running away.

He expresses what it is waiting from X: she has to respect her engagement and the rules (curfew…), she has to be motivated and she has to go to school. Analysis [ 29 ] X is entrusted to a rehabilitation centre since February 2018 and she moves from one unit to another one depending of her

running away and her suicidal thoughts. As the DYP worker said, she is in an identity crisis. We have to keep in mind that she was adopted, her adopted mother was sick for a long time and pasted away, she had been entrusted to her biological mother for seven years, and because of the negligence she suffered at that place, she had been entrusted to foster family in the North and finally in foster families down South. Now her biological mother is nowhere to be found and she misses her a lot. During the seven years she lived with her biological mother she created bonds with her. Now she was abandoned another time.

Any other children in the same situation would be in an identity crisis also. [ 30 ] The DYP would like to understand why she runs away before starting a reintegration in a foster family. The answer is very easy. She needs to find her mother, she needs to connect with her culture. She expresses her needs, but since February nothing was done to help her as nobody hears her. She ran away and she was found two weeks after and she had been sexually abused for another time. Doing that, she continues to accumulate traumas. She is under the responsibility of the DYP. How can she run away?

Why no more supervision was offered, knowing that she runs away and she put herself in danger? Why nothing is done to help her to have answers to her many identity questions? [ 31 ] The DYP worker testifies about his willing to go with her in the street and to communicate with shelters in City A where her mother could be. But since February, why it was not done? It’s not enough to speak about it, it’s urgent to make it. During that time, X is looking for her mother in City A and is waiting for visits in the North with family members. She is just waiting.

Will she be in standby until she reaches her majority and will be allowed to look after by herself, without been prepared to reality? [ 32 ] The objective of the Youth Protection Act is to put an end to the situation of compromising, not to add other motives of intervention. It’s urgent that X receive the services, the help and the attention she deserves and she needs. [ 33 ] This situation raises a lot of concerns regarding the lack of supervision and the lack of services provided to X. The Court will recommend the Commission des Droits de la Personne et des Droits de la Jeunesse to investigate in this file.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 34 ] GRANTS the application; [ 35 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the youth X, born on [...], 2004, are still in danger; [ 36 ] ORDERS that the youth be entrusted to an institution operating a rehabilitation centre, chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre with a possibility of reintegration in a foster family; [ 37 ] ORDERS that X receive specific health care and health services required by her situation notably a psychological assessment and that all recommendations be followed including any other evaluation recommended by the psychologist; [ 38 ] ORDERS that the youth take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 39 ] INVITES the biological mother, Ms. B to take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 40 ] ORDERS that the youth attend a school or another place of learning or participate in a program geared to developing skills and autonomy; [ 41 ] ORDERS that X benefit from a minimum of three visits per year in the North to have contact with her extended family members; [ 42 ] RECOMMENDS that the biological mother seek help through Social Services for her alcohol, drugs and personal issues; [ 43 ] GRANTS the exercise of the attributes of parental authority to the Director of Youth Protection regarding consents pertaining to medical needs, school, extracurricular activities, travelling and passport; [ 44 ] ORDERS that the Director of Youth Protection take the necessary steps to find the biological mother and to organize a beginning of contacts between X and Ms.

B, if the situation allows it and after having adequately prepared X to this contact; [ 45 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the youth and the biological mother, Ms.

B, be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for the modalities, frequency and degree of supervision; [ 46 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling or assistance to the youth, the family and the foster family; [ 47 ] RECOMMENDS to the Commission des Droits de la Personne et des Droits de la Jeunesse to do an investigate in this file and INVITES the Commission to make any other recommendations; [ 48 ] ORDERS the clerk of the Court of Quebec, Youth Division to notify this decision to the Commission des Droits de la Personne et des Droits de la Jeunesse; [ 49 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate to the execution of the enactment; [ 50 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth X , to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 51 ] THE WHOLE until April 18, 2019.

__________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q. Me Geneviève Apollon, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Date of hearing: October 29, 2018