2018 QCCQ 20671, 2018 QCCQ 20671

Protection de la jeunesse — 1811465 2018 QCCQ 20671 JO0374 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] Youth Division No: 525-41-028925-147 DATE : September 13, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE KAREN OHAYON, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE CASE OF: X Born […], 2004 Director of Youth Protection A Applicant A Father B Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95, Y.P.A.) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: Within the framework of the Youth Protection Act, no person may publish or broadcast information allowing 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 (Y.P.A. sections 11.2.2 and 135). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (the Director) is asking the Court to extend the order rendered on July 6, 2017, placing the adolescent in a rehabilitation centre until May 11, 2018 with a social follow-up as well as other various corrective measures. [ 2 ] The Director alleges that despite the persistence of certain behavioural issues, the adolescent has shown sufficient improvement to warrant a return to his father’s care.

Close monitoring of the situation and the continuation of services remain a necessity nevertheless. [ 3 ] A provisional order entrusting the adolescent to his father and maintaining all other compatible measures was obtained just prior to the expiration of the current order. [ 4 ] The Director is asking the Court to maintain the adolescent with his father along with a social follow-up and other corrective measures for a year. [ 5 ] The mother acknowledges the accuracy of the situation as reported in the various court reports filed into evidence.

She agrees with the recommendations made by the Director. [ 6 ] The father is of the opinion that his son has demonstrated significant improvement since the last order. Although he generally agrees with the recommendations, he questions the necessity of maintaining any supervision other than parental during visits between X and his younger brother Y. [ 7 ] X is in agreement with the conclusions sought by the Director. The Situation [ 8 ] The Director’s evidence was essentially presented in the form of a court report filed with the consent of the parties.

The report highlights persistent difficulties with X’s behaviour both at school and in the reception centre. He continues to be described as oppositional, disruptive, defiant and belligerent. He often refuses to complete homework and fails to follow basic rules. With peers, he demonstrates an unfortunate lack of empathy and intimidates those more vulnerable. In particular, the taunting of another student in an astonishing display of insensitivity has led to the adolescent’s suspension.

[ 9 ] According to the social worker, the father generally continues to minimize the seriousness of the adolescent’s difficulties. On the question of his son’s suspension, the father argued in favour of cancelling the consequence, failing to see what purpose would thereby be served by removing him from class. [ 10 ] Of particular concern is the adolescent’s inability to acknowledge wrongdoing.

His tendency to blame others, to minimize or to trivialize the seriousness of his behaviour has shown little sign of improvement. [ 11 ] According to the father however, the adolescent has shown important gains regarding his ability to manage his emotions. He is no longer prone to the outbursts that were problematic in the past. Furthermore, despite failing two core courses at school this year, he was able to buckle down and successfully complete them during summer school.

The father maintains that despite imposing a more structured routine in the home, he has no difficulties with X and feels confident that he’s on the right track. [ 12 ] Regarding the family dynamics and interpersonal relations, some progress has been observed. The parents’ conflictive relationship has shown signs of improvement albeit with occasional setbacks. It should be noted that the tension between the two remains palpable despite the improvement. [ 13 ] The adolescent’s relationship with his mother has improved somewhat although it remains fragile.

While therapy for the two was available, the adolescent refused to participate beyond a first session. [ 14 ] Individual therapy has also been proposed and the adolescent has expressed being open to the idea even though he has refused the opportunity in the past. [ 15 ] Visits between the adolescent and his younger brother have produced mitigated results.

Although the boys clearly wish to spend time together, X’s behavioural difficulties remain problematic in the context of their relationship and certain regrettable incidents have been noted. [ 16 ] The social worker has expressed his intention to maintain supervision by a third party other than the parents for a while longer with the objective of allowing parental supervision in the short term, if the situation allows.

Considering the history between the two boys as well as Y’s heightened vulnerability, a certain measure of prudence is justified. [ 17 ] The evidence reveals that the adolescent’s behaviour remains of great concern. Still, in the social worker’s opinion, the adolescent has demonstrated sufficient improvement to justify entrusting him to his father. [ 18 ] The Court has reservations regarding both the extent of these improvements and the adolescent’s capacity to maintain them.

Nevertheless, the adolescent appears to be doing relatively well since returning to the father’s home and, in this context, a certain optimism is permitted.

That being said, the situation remains extremely fragile and close monitoring will be required. [ 19 ] In light of the situation, the Court concludes that the adolescent’s interests are best served by the measures proposed by the Director. [ 20 ] FOR THESE REASONS, [ 21 ] THE COURT: [ 22 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 23 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the adolescent continue to be endangered; [ 24 ] ENTRUSTS the adolescent to the care of the father; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contact between the adolescent and his mother be determined by the Director; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contact between the adolescent and his brother Y be determined by the Director, including supervision; [ 27 ] RECOMMENDS that the adolescent and his parents follow through with the recommendations of the psychiatric and psychological assessments; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the adolescent receive specific health services namely a psychological therapy if he so desires; [ 29 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that the adolescent has expressed today his agreement to participate in individual therapy; [ 30 ] RECOMMENDS that both parents seek and participate in individual support and/or therapeutic services to address their parenting and personal issues; [ 31 ] ORDERS that both parents not expose the adolescent to their conflicts; [ 32 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that both parents agree to refrain from discussing with the adolescent the relevancy of him having to attend therapy nor the medication nor the content of the therapy; [ 33 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents develop an effective form of communication while exchanging information regarding the adolescent; [ 34 ] TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE of both parents’ consent; AUTHORIZES the Director to obtain and share pertinent and necessary information with any treating professional or support services other than individual therapy with respect to the father, except

for the purpose of ensuring his presence in such services; [ 35 ] ORDERS that a person working for a Child and Youth Protection Centre provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and his family; [ 36 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent, X to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 37 ] THE WHOLE for a period of one year. SIGNED IN TOWN A On September 26, 2018 __________________________________ KAREN OHAYON, J.C.Q. Me Dominique Douglas Attorney for the D.Y.P. Me Judith Shapiro-Knight Attorney for the adolescent Dates of hearing: September 13, 2018