2017 QCCQ 4305, 2017 QCCQ 4305

Protection de la jeunesse — 171821 2017 QCCQ 4305 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000702-159 DATE: March 29, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE MARIE-CLAUDE BÉLANGER, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ M. [SOCIAL WORKER 1], exercising his profession at the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A, having a place of business at [...], City A, district A, [...] Applicant -and- X, domiciled and residing at [...] in City B, district B, [...] Child -and- MRS A, domiciled and residing at [...] in City B, district B, [...] Mother -and- M.

B, domiciled and residing at [...] at City C, district A, [...] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON A DRAFT AGREEMENT (Sec. 95 par. 3 of 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 ] The Director of Youth Protection makes an application to have the security and the development of X, born on [...], 2004, declared still endangered. [ 2 ] The parties submitted to this Court a draft agreement on measures to put an end to the situation that still compromises the security and the development of the child. [ 3 ] The child is present and represented by a lawyer.

The parents are present but not represented. [ 4 ] The draft agreement states that the consent of the parties was given in a free and enlightened manner.

The parties acknowledge the following facts which endanger the security and the development of X: 2.1 The child returned under his mother’s care following his placement in the rehabilitation centre; 2.2 The child made some improvement regarding his self-control; 2.3 The child still struggles with emotional issues and is receiving a psychological follow-up; 2.4 The father does not collaborate in the social follow-up; 2.5 2.6 At the time the father expressed that he refused to work with a worker to establish his contacts with the child; 2.7 Attempts have been made to reach the father and seek his collaboration; 2.8 The child suffers from his father’s absence and lack of collaboration; 2.9 The applicant ignores if the father received services to address his aggressiveness and educational methods by a professional;

2.10 At the beginning of the current school year, there were some attendance difficulties by the child but the mother addressed the issue and the situation improved; 2.11 The child experiences some behaviour difficulties in school and has sometimes difficulties to interact positively with other students; 2.12 The mother offers a good collaboration with the school and the social services; 2.13 The mother is able to answer the needs of the child and offer an adequate supervision; 2.14 The mother experiences some difficulties in maintaining the discipline towards the child when he insist or acts immaturely; [ 5 ] They also agree on several measures in order to put an end to the situation which endangers the child’s security and development: 3.1 That X be entrusted to his mother; 3.2 That the contacts between the father and the child be supervised by the DYP as for its modalities, frequency and length; 3.3 That the parents actively collaborate to different measures to put an end to the compromising situation; 3.4 That the father be sober at all time in the presence of his child; 3.5 That the parents make sure the child is not exposed to any form of violence (verbal, physical or other); 3.6 That the father engage himself in services that will address the schooling methods, violent behavior and the sexually inadequate climate with a professional or an institution of his choice; 3.7 That aid, counseling and assistance be provided to the youth and his family for a period of 8 months. [ 6 ] Accordingly, the Court is of the opinion that the measures are likely to put an end to the situation and respect the rights and the interest of the child.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 7 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 8 ] MAINTAINS that the security and development of X are still in danger; [ 9 ] ORDERS the implementation of the measures mentioned in the draft agreement sighed and submitted by the parties and ORDERS the parties to respect these measures; [ 10 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of the Youth Protection for the purpose of executing the measures. __________________________________ MARIE-CLAUDE BÉLANGER, J.C.Q. M e Julie Lemire Lemire, Gaouette & Martel Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux Lawyer for the D.Y.P.

M e Daniel Ouellette Legal Aid Lawyer for the child Date of hearing: February 28, 2017