2016 QCCQ 5353, 2016 QCCQ 5353

Protection de la jeunesse — 161703 JL 4031 COURT OF QUÉBEC 2016 QCCQ 5353 YOUTH DIVISION CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] No: 525-41-023094-105 DATE : March 23 rd , 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF : THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE LAMOUREUX, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION A Director and X Born on [...], 2001 Adolescent And A B parents ______________________________________________________________________ J U D G M E N T (SECTION 95 OF THE YOUTH PROTECTION ACT ) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcasting of any information that may lead to the identification of a child or his parents.

Any person who contravenes this provision commits an offence and is liable to fine. [ Y.P.A. sections 11.2.1 and 135 ] [ 1 ] The Court is seized of a Motion filed pursuant to

Section 95 of the Youth Protection Act, by a person duly mandated by the Director of Youth Protection A (" the Director" ), to revise an order rendered by the undersigned on February 26, 2015, entrusting X to his mother under various specific conditions, the whole for a period of one year. [ 2 ] In its motion dated December 8, 2015, the Director alleges that X is exhibiting behaviour problems at home and at school and that his mother has also resumed consuming alcohol and prescription drugs.

It is alleged that the mother could no longer provide X with the structure he needed and that rehabilitation centre placement was therefore required. [ 3 ] As explained later, X has been in rehabilitation centre placement under a provisional order since December 10, 2015. [ 4 ] Today, the Director is recommending that X return to his mother’s care with various support services for a period of one year. [ 5 ] The mother and X are present, both assisted by respective counsel. The father is absent but was duly notified.

At the parties’ request, the Court proceeds in his absence. [ 6 ] The mother and X both accepted the filing of various reports serve as evidence and essentially agree with the measures

proposed by the Director. [ 7 ] The evidence establishes that indeed, following the February 2015 Court order, X ran into serious difficulties at school leading to suspension in June 2015. These difficulties include not working in class, being disruptive and intimidating, bringing drug paraphernalia and appearing depressed.

It was X’s bringing a large hunting knife to school that led to his suspension. [ 8 ] At home, X was often in conflict with his mother’s partner and with his younger sister. [ 9 ] During this period, the mother collaborated with the youth protection worker but appeared to be struggling with her own issues. She would often justify X’s school absences and missed numerous random drug tests. [ 10 ] During the summer, X was sent home early from camp due to his behaviour. [ 11 ] X’s problems continued into the new 2015-2016 school year. He was consuming regularly, admittedly about five times per week.

At the same time, X showed signs of depression. The mother did not always follow-up on ensuring that X showed up for services in regard to this issue. [ 12 ] In early December 2015, X’s situation was again signalled in relation to school absenteeism and his attending school under the influence. X had also been visiting his father, who had recently been released from a three month incarceration. X would do so without authorization and on occasion, his father’s spouse, Mrs. C, would allow him to consume drugs. X as well was presenting with increasing mental health issues.

At the same time, the mother appeared distressed and unable to ensure X’s wellbeing. [ 13 ] These issues led to X’s rehabilitation centre placement in mid-December 2015. [ 14 ] Since then, X and his mother have worked hard to address their respective issues and family problems as well. X states that he only consumed drugs once since December. His mother is more present and ensuring that X is getting much needed help and support. X has spent weekends and spring break at home without incident. Educator services have been implemented since February 2016.

X is now seeing a therapist regularly and is to undergo a psychiatric assessment in the near future. Although registered to return to his former school, X believes that he won’t resort to his former behaviour. [ 15 ] X wants to return home and his mother agrees. [ 16 ] The father is only marginally involved with the Director.

There is no evidence that he has taken any measures to deal with his own problems, including anger management and drug use. [ 17 ] Thus, overall, the Court is convinced that X’s placement was required but that he can return home with very good chances of him remaining there provided that he and his mother stay away from substance abuse and that they continue to fully collaborate with the services that will be at their disposal. [ 18 ] AS A RESULT AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : [ 19 ] GRANTS the Motion for Revision ; and [ 20 ] DECLARES that the security or development of the adolescent is still compromised; [ 21 ] AND PURSUANT TO THE POWERS GRANTED UNDER

SECTION 91 AND 91.1 OF THE YOUTH PROTECTION ACT , THE COURT ORDERS THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 22 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted to his mother; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the father and X be determined by the Director, including supervision if deemed necessary; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between X and Ms.

C be determined by the Director, taking into account the mother’s and X’s positions; [ 25 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the father participate in and complete an appropriate anger management program; [ 26 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the father participate in and complete an appropriate substance abuse program; [ 27 ] AUTHORIZES the Director to obtain/share information with the father’s probation officer; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the parents ensure that X is not exposed to any alcohol or drug use; [ 29 ] ORDERS that X undergo random drug testing; [ 30 ] RECOMMENDS that X undergo treatment for his substance abuse; [ 31 ] ORDERS that X undergo a psychiatric assessment and follow through with the recommendations; [ 32 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents undergo random drug testing; [ 33 ] ORDERS a person working for [Center A] to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and the family; [ 34 ] THE WHOLE FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR;

[ 35 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent, to the Director of Youth Protection As for the purposes of the execution of this judgment; [ 36 ] ORDERS the execution of this judgement by any peace officer, if necessary; _______________________________________ CLAUDE LAMOUREUX, J.C.Q. Me Marie-Josée Paiement Attorney for the Director Me Marie-Odile Lamaute Attorney for the adolescent Me François De Vette Attorney for the Mother Hearing dates: CL/nl December 21 st , 2015, February 10 th & March 23 rd , 2016