2021 QCCQ 8444, 2021 QCCQ 8444

Protection de la jeunesse — 215014 2021 QCCQ 8444 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] “Youth Division” No: 455-41-001375-211 DATE: July 9, 2021 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PASCALE BERARDINO, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE SITUATION OF: X Born on [...], 2009 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of CIUSSS A Applicant -and- A -and- B Child’s parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT [1] ______________________________________________________________________ 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.).

Introduction [ 1 ] The Director is requesting that Court declares the security and development of the child X in danger for the motive of educational neglect. [ 2 ] As protective measures, the Director recommends that the Tribunal entrust the child to her parents and proposes different measures and a social follow-up for a period of nine months. [ 3 ] At the hearing on July 9, 2021, the parents are present via video. [ 4 ] The parties had previously tried to proceed by filing an agreement but the father indicated on the document that he had signed “under duress”.

The Tribunal then set a hearing date. [ 5 ] The mother is in agreement with the Director’s application. [ 6 ] The father expressed some disagreement as will be further explained. [ 7 ] The child’s lawyer, after hearing the evidence, agrees with the conclusions sought, although her client wishes for a shorter measure.

Situation of compromision and the voluntary measures agreements [ 8 ] X is twelve years old and lives with her parents and her four siblings. [ 9 ] Her situation is known to the Director as it was previously judicialized on the grounds of physical abuse [2] . [ 10 ] The situation described at the time was that X had behavioural difficulties for the last two years. She quarrelled with her peers

at school and with her siblings at home. She had even started stealing. [ 11 ] She presented with ADD but was not medicated. [ 12 ] X had mentioned that her father hit her with his hand and a belt, once under her feet. [ 13 ] The father had admitted to using physical punishment.

For the event when he hit her under the feet he said that X had stolen three times during the same day. [ 14 ] Her parents were collaborating well with the Director, trying to find way to better cope with their daughter’s disturbing behaviour. [ 15 ] After an order maintain the child at home with a nine month social follow-up, the case was closed by the Director. [ 16 ] Soon after the closure, the child’s situation was signalled again and the parents agreed to sign a Voluntary Measures Agreement, this time on the grounds of educational neglect. [ 17 ] The first agreement was signed on July 29, 2019, for a period of nine months.

It was extended for another period of 12 months on April 28, 2020. [ 18 ] This last agreement states that there had been improvement in the situation as the child’s behaviour was less problematic. It is noted that X steals less than before; instead of every day, she does it once a week or less. Therefore, she is less punished. [ 19 ] The parents still reported being overwhelmed by the child’s behaviour and their interventions were not always in proportion to the child’s behaviour.

They required help. [ 20 ] X was receiving a follow-up from a child psychiatrist and received services at school. [ 21 ] She was also referred to a nutritionist to cope with her anxiety. [ 22 ] The child and the parents participated in a follow-up with an educator. [ 23 ] The sanitary measures due to the pandemic situation seem to have had a positive effect on the child’s behaviour as she was less exposed to her peers at school. [ 24 ] In July 2020, X began a psychological follow-up to address her anxiety and her low self-esteem. [ 25 ] During this year of follow-up, there were a few situations of crisis in the family where X takes something she is not allowed to and the consequences can be exaggerated. [ 26 ] In November 2020, a crisis occurred that led the father to ask that the child be entrusted to someone else.

He would later change his mind. [ 27 ] The situation has improved, but the parents can still apply lengthy consequences when the child misbehaves. The review [ 28 ] When the child’s situation came for review in the March 2021, the mother said she would like for the Director to stay a bit longer since she anticipated a lot of changes in the next year among which X starting high school. [ 29 ] The father, on the other hand, said that the Director’s presence was no longer helping the situation.

He explained that it undermined his authority towards his daughter as she would threaten to call the DYP when he wanted to apply a consequence for a bad behaviour. [ 30 ] He also said he no longer considered placement for her daughter. [ 31 ] He also mentioned that he had changed his educational methods and that he no longer needed the Director’s help. [ 32 ] The Director’s analysis was that the family still needed their services. [ 33 ] X feels rejected by her family.

She knows about placement plans and thinks she is the problem. [ 34 ] It is hard for the parents to restrain consequences because their daughter’s behaviour is in opposite to their values and they react emotionally towards her. [ 35 ] When they do so, X is getting the attention that she seeks, although it is a negative one. [ 36 ] This cycle is hard to break. [ 37 ] In addition, there is a cultural component to the situation where X is the parents’ first born who has an important role in the family which X is not able to fulfill because of her difficulties.

The parents’ expectations are high but X is not able to meet them. [ 38 ] The Director decided to extend her intervention to support the family, particularly in the context described by the mother. The situation was judicialized. [ 39 ] At the hearing, the father expressed his point of view about his opposition to the continued involvement of the Director.

Nonetheless, he assured that he would comply with the Court’s order. [ 40 ] In

summary, he said that things were going well with X and that he no longer required the services of the DYP.

He explained he felt left out of the social follow-up but at the same time that he did not have the time to sit and discuss in length with workers. [ 41 ] He also expresses the difficulties of being an emigrant family and feeling being discriminated and that the “system” is hurting him and his family values. [ 42 ] Nonetheless, the situation remains fragile and the Director has demonstrated that her situation remained compromised. [ 43 ] The Court finds in order to ensure that X continues to receive services while going through important changes in her life, the Director should continue to be involved in her family. [ 44 ] As for the duration of the present order, the Court finds that a shorter order that what recommended by the Director will attain this objective.

FOR ALL THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: GRANTS partially the present application; DECLARES that the security and the development of the child X are in danger on the grounds of educational neglect; ENTRUSTS the child to her parents; ORDERS that the child’s parents periodically report to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in their child’s regard to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is in danger; ORDERS that the parents take an active and honest

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court, namely to the elaboration of the intervention plan and the psychological follow-up; ORDERS that a person working for the Director of Youth Protection of the CIUSSS A or any other establishment or body provides aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her family until December 15, 2021; ENTRUST the situation of the child X to the Director of Youth Protection to see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ PASCALE BERARDINO, J.C.Q.

M e Christine Loubier Counsel for the DYP M e Karyn Brown Counsel for the youth Date of hearing: July 9, 2021 Exhibits deposed: D-1 to D-5 Date of written judgment: August 16, 2021