2017 QCCQ 18286, 2017 QCCQ 18286

Protection de la jeunesse — 178363 2017 QCCQ 18286 JA1021 COURT OF QUÉBEC Youth Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF […] N °: 505-41-008622-179 DATE: June 29, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDED BY THE JUDGE JEAN-PIERRE AUTHIER, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A (The Director) Applicant -and- X, born on [...], 2002 Adolescent respondent -and- A Mother-Respondent B Father-Respondent ______________________________________________________________________ J U D G M E N T

Section 95 paragraph 2 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 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A .] [ 1 ] This judgment confirms and motivates the oral ruling rendered on the bench on June 29, 2017. [ 2 ] Both the 15-year-old adolescent and her parents consign their admissions and agree to the Director’s proposed orientation.

CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS [ 3 ] In virtue of the preceding judgment, the adolescent is entrusted to a reception center. The latter visited her parents on weekends though the parents occasionally refused contacts due to the adolescent’s misbehaviour. [ 4 ] However, the parents minimally collaborated with the Director, but report that the adolescent has recently adopted a better

attitude and is making progress. She has difficulties in school. [ 5 ] The adolescent is now with child and indicated that she intends to keep the baby, but refuses to go to A House.

The parents are planning to support their daughter with her motherhood. [ 6 ] The evidence demonstrates that the adolescent no longer requires the structure and the neutrality of a reception center, but a close monitoring by the social services, namely an educator, in the family milieu until she delivers. [ 7 ] After considering the evidence, the Tribunal determines that the Director’s evaluation and orientation respect the adolescent’s best interest as well as the principles of the law.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 8 ] GRANTS the application; [ 9 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the adolescent X are still in danger; [ 10 ] EXTENDS the Court order rendered on October 3, 2016; [ 11 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to her parents; [ 12 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and her parents take an active

part into the application of the measures ordered; [ 13 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counselling or assistance to the adolescent and her family; [ 14 ] ORDERS the services of an educator as deemed necessary; [ 15 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the present judgment; [ 16 ] THE WHOLE until March 29, 2018. ________________________________ Jean-Pierre Authier , J.Q.C. M tre Karine Nantais Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection M tre Hélène Robitaille Attorney for the adolescent Parents unrepresented Hearing date: June 29, 2017