2021 QCCQ 15225, 2021 QCCQ 15225

Protection de la jeunesse — 218780 2021 QCCQ 15225 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] Youth Division No: 635-41-001120-218 DATE: September 21, 2021 (written judgment rendered on November 26, 2021) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born [...], 2021 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] & [SOCIAL WORKER 2], Youth Protection workers, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., working in Town A, district A (Quebec) Applicants and A, residing and domiciled at […], in Town A, district A (Quebec) Mother and B , residing and domiciled at […], in Town A, district A (Quebec) Father ______________________________________________________________________ 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 review a decision rendered on May 3, 2021, regarding the child X, born [...], 2021. At that date the Court declared the security and development endangered, entrusted the child to Ms.

C for a period of 3 months and allowed a reintegration of the child with the parents during the said period. [ 2 ] The DYP submits that the situation does not allow to return the child to his parents and asks that X be entrusted to a foster family, until March 30, 2022. Position of the Parties [ 3 ] Despite being dully served the parents are absent and not represented. They clearly mentioned that they would not attend the hearing and that they had given their child to D. [ 4 ] The child is 7 months old. He is absent, but represented by Me Kelly Ann Sinnett.

After hearing the evidence, Me Sinnett submits to the Court that his situation continue to be endangered and that the measures are in his best interest. History of the Situation [ 5 ] On March 9, 2021 , the Court entrusted the child to a foster family on provisional measures. [ 6 ] On May 3, 2021 , the Court was seized with an application for protection. The child was 2 months old. The parents have 6 other children. 2 of them are adults, the others are all entrusted to foster families or rehabilitation centre. Both parents have alcohol consumption and conjugal violence issues.

The mother admits her alcohol consumption during her pregnancy. The child was entrusted to a foster family in Town B after his birth. The parents totally refuse to collaborate with the DYP. The oldest sister of the child agreed to foster him. The Court declared that the security and development of the child were endangered and entrusted him under his sister’s care, Ms.

C for a period of 3 months and ordered that the child be entrusted back under his parents care after, the whole until May 31, 2022. [ 7 ] On August 5, 2021 , the Court entrusted the child to a foster family under provisional measures and took judicial notice that the child would be entrusted to Ms. D and Ms. E. The Court also authorized the DYP to register the child to the Directeur de l’État civil. Facts and Analysis [ 8 ] As ordered previously, the child remained under his sister care.

He was doing well and she was meeting his developmental milestones. [ 9 ] As the delay for the reintegration ordered by the Court approached, the parents were still not collaborative. The foster mother

informed the DYP worker that the parents decided to give the child for adoption and they have suggested the initial foster mothers, Ms. D and Ms. E with whom the parents remained in contact. [ 10 ] The DYP worker tries to confirm the information with the parents, but they refused to answer. The day after, the mother came at the office and confirmed that it was true. [ 11 ] On her side, the sister was also met to know more about her intention on a longer period. She honestly express not being able to continue to take care of the child and that she will not consider adopting him.

She considers that the child would have a better life with his previous foster parents. [ 12 ] On July 30, 2021, the DYP worker received an e-mail from the sister saying that she was staying at Ms. D and Ms. E’s place with the child and she asked the DYP’s authorization to leave the child under their care. The DYP worker insists on having a clear position from the parents. During that time, the foster mother created strong bonds with Ms. D and Ms.

E. [ 13 ] The DYP worker was able to meet with the parents with the help of their daughter and they confirmed their desire to have the child adopted by the previous foster mothers. [ 14 ] The foster mothers and the sister would like to keep in contact. They told her that she is welcome at their place at any time. They also kept a good contact with the parents. [ 15 ] The sister has a strong interest to maintain a close contact with the baby. [ 16 ] The situation of the child obviously continues to be endangered. The plan suggested by the parents is in the best interest of the child.

They were very courageous to take such decision. It is also in the best interest of the child to keep contact with his biological family and particularly with his sister who was present to take care of him. FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 17 ] GRANTS the application; [ 18 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born [...], 2021, are still endangered; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to Ms. E and Ms. D, if they are accredited as a foster family, that the child be entrusted to them as such; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the parents remain sober and refrain from any kind of violence in the presence of the child; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the modalities, frequency and degree of supervision of the contacts between the child and the parents be determined after an agreement between all parties and if no agreement can be reached, that the Director of Youth Protection determined the contacts; [ 23 ] AUTHORIZES and ENCOURAGES contacts between the child and his siblings, notably with his sister C; [ 24 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to perform unannounced visits at the parents’ or other members of the family’s residence when the child is present; [ 25 ] WITHDRAWS the attributes of parental authority from the parents and GRANTS it to the Director of Youth Protection without any restrictions; [ 26 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth protection to maintain the parents aware of the decision taken; [ 27 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to prepare a life plan for the child; [ 28 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to submit a request for simplified access to Government Programs and Services relating to the birth of the child; [ 29 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or a body, provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the family; [ 30 ] THE WHOLE until March 31, 2022. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Geneviève Apollon, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Kelly Ann Sinnett, attorney for the child Date of hearing: September 21, 2021