2012 QCCQ 13597, 2012 QCCQ 13597

Protection de la jeunesse — 124894 2012 QCCQ 13597 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division N os : 640-41-001387-114 and 640-41-001388-112 DATE: September 25, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF : X , born on […], 2010 Y , born on […], 2009 MR [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection Worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, Quebec, district A Petitioner and MRS A, residing and domiciled in Town A, Quebec, district A Mother and MR B, residing and domiciled in Town A, Quebec, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 (par. 1) Y.P.A. , chap.

P-34.1 R.S.Q. ) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Mr [Social Worker 1], delegate of the Director of Youth Protection A, asks the Court to review the decisions rendered on May 22, 2012 concerning Y and X .

He asks for the children's placement in foster care for another period of six months, with progressive reintegration with the parents if their situation allows it, and if not, that a permanent life project be determined. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the children are represented by Me Cassandra Neptune, the mother by Me Angela Tommasel and Me Robert- André Adam represents the petitioner. The father is present, not represented. [ 3 ] The mother disagrees with the recommendations, even if she admits most of the allegations.

The father denies many allegations and disagrees with the children's placement in foster home. [ 4 ] The evidence of the new facts in support of the revision is based on admissions, testimonies of the father, the mother, the police officer, the social worker and his revision report. [ 5 ] The parents still display alcohol and conjugal related problems. Even if they made promises to the Court before that they would gain control over their life and accept to receive support, they do not collaborate anymore.

They did not present themselves at the Social Services at least once a week and alcohol was found in their home. On July 26, police officer Longstreet intervenes twice in the family. First, for the drunken driving of the mother, later, for a violence incident at home between the parents. Alcohol and drugs were included in this event. [ 6 ] On July 10, the father was aggressive towards the social worker. On July 12, the Youth Protection had to intervene with the family because the parents were intoxicated in presence of the children. They were crying and dirty that night.

The child Y had multiple unexplained scratches on his face and on his head. The father was arrested then for conjugal violence and spent the night in jail. [ 7 ] The parents' situation remains the same over the last months. The parents do not make the necessary steps to end the compromission situation of their children. They still declare that they want to change, but are unable to take actions. The children suffered of the situation and are entitled to evolve in a warm, stable and secure environment. Since 2009, they have been placed a few times and also maintained with their parents.

They made promises to collaborate and to seek for therapy, but they did not. The same problematic family pattern remains and endangers the children. [ 8 ] Consequently, the Court will order the children's placement in a foster family for six months giving the last chance to the parents to work on their personal and marital problems. This decision is based on

Section 91.1 of the Youth Protection Act , and at the expiration of the six-month placement of the children, if the parents' situation is still problematic, the Court will have to make an order at ensuring continuity of care, stable relationships and stable living conditions.

[ 9 ] The parents must decide in their children's best interest. [ 10 ] CONSEQUENTLY, THE COURT : [ 11 ] GRANTS the petitions; [ 12 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X and Y are still in danger; [ 13 ] ORDERS the placement of X and Y in foster home for a period of six months; [ 14 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to supervise the contacts and visits of the children with their parents in term of frequency, duration, place and under supervision of a third party; [ 15 ] ORDERS the parents to seek for detoxification therapy and marital therapy; [ 16 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the children and their parents for a period of six months; [ 17 ] ORDERS the parents to present themselves at the Social Services with or any other social worker authorized by the Director of Youth Protection as often as required, but at least once a week; [ 18 ] ORDERS the parents to take an active

part in the application of any measures ordered by the Court; [ 19 ] ORDERS any police officer to collaborate in the execution of the present judgment; [ 20 ] ENTRUSTS the children's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing this enactment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. Me Robert-André Adam, attorney for the petitioner Me Angela Tommasel, attorney for the mother Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the children Date of hearing: August 28, 2012