2017 QCCQ 21155, 2017 QCCQ 21155

Protection de la jeunesse — 1711525 2017 QCCQ 21155 JA0940 QUEBEC COURT Youth Division Canada PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] N° : 525-41- 032861-171 DATE : October 17, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING JUDGE : THE HONOURABLE MARIE ARCHAMBAULT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ In the matter of: X born on [...], 2015 THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant and A , mother B , father Respondents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 38 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 ] As required under

Section 90 of the Youth Protection Act, the present judgment confirms in writing the decision rendered orally at the hearing held on October 17 th , 2017. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection (the Director) seizes Court of the situation of the child alleging that his security and development are compromised due to negligence and risk of negligence.

The Director is asking that the child be entrusted to the care of his father and that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the family for a period of nine months. [ 3 ] Both parents make a general admission of the facts alleged in support of the motion except for the statement pertaining to a diagnosis of depression for the mother.

Both parents agree with the recommendations of the Director and are committed to collaborate with the intervention of the Director. [ 4 ] Counsel for the child makes no admission on the facts alleged in support of the application but agrees with the recommendations of the Director. CONTEXT [ 5 ] The parents separated in April 2017. Initially, they shared the responsibility of the child. Since mid-June, the child has been living with his father on a full-time basis given that the situation of the mother has deteriorated.

[ 6 ] Both parents recognize that the mother has a history of depression and suicidal ideation. Since the separation, the mother has made repeated suicide threats. [ 7 ] Following the separation, the mother moved in with a roommate who would babysit the child while the mother was at work. A few weeks later, the roommate was assuming more and more responsibilities as the mother’s work

schedule had changed and the mother was less available for his son. [ 8 ] Mid-June 2017, the father is concerned about the mother’s mental health and wellbeing. He receives from her text messages threatening that she will end her life. [ 9 ] It is on June 22 nd , 2017, that the Director receives the signalement concerning the child.

The evaluation reveals that the child’s basic needs were neglected when the child was in the care of his mother. [ 10 ] The evaluation also reveals the vulnerability of the mother in regards to her mental health related to her longstanding history of suicidal ideations and suicidal threats. [ 11 ] Both parents welcome the help and support provided by the Director and seem to be committed to offer their full collaboration. The mother has started parenting classes. She sees her son regularly under the supervision of the father. She wishes to continue to live with her paternal aunt.

She wishes to “work on herself” and stabilize her situation. [ 12 ] The Director has established that the security and development of the child are compromised due to neglect and risk of neglect. The measures recommended meet the needs of the child and are in his best interest. AS A CONSEQUENCE AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 13 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child are compromised due to neglect (failing to meet the basic physical needs of the child and failing to provide the child with appropriate supervision and support) and risk of neglect.

AND, BY VIRTUE OF AND PURSUANT TO THE POWERS GRANTED UNDER SECTIONS 91 AND 91.1 OF THE YOUTH PROTECTION ACT, THE COURT ORDERS THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 14 ] ENTRUSTS the child to his father, Mr.

B; [ 15 ] RECOMMENDS to the mother to receive a psychological follow-up through a community resource such as the CLSC; [ 16 ] RECOMMENDS the mother to secure an appropriate and stable residence; [ 17 ] RECOMMENDS to the father to continue to collaborate with the professionals from the CLSC and follow their recommendations; [ 18 ] ORDERS the parents to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection; [ 19 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the child and his parents for a period of nine (9) months; [ 20 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A , who shall then see that the measures are carried out.

Signed in Town A on November 24 th , 2017 _________________________________ MARIE ARCHAMBAULT, J.C.Q. Me Heidi Lechter Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Alec Fafard Attorney for the child Date of hearing : October 17 th , 2017