2020 QCCQ 11168, 2020 QCCQ 11168

Protection de la jeunesse — 208059 2020 QCCQ 11168 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 614-41-000535-205 DATE: December 7, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE LUCILLE CHABOT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCAIL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, Applicant and X, born on [...], 2008 Child and A Mother and B Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (

Section 95 , Youth Protection Act , CQLR, c. P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 alleges that it is necessary to review and extend the judgment rendered by Judge Denyse Leduc on May 19, 2020. The Court declared the security and development of X in danger in regard of

section 38 b) 1 o iii and

f) of Youth Protection Act [1] , that is to say for lack of supervision and behavioural disturbances. The child was entrusted to his parents and measures were ordered to help the child and the family, especially a psychological follow-up. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the adolescent, accompanied by his two parents, is present.

They all agree with the recommendations made by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 3 ] The revision report, a letter from the Art Therapist working with the child and a document titled “X’s Journey to Success” are filed in evidence. [ 4 ] On October 12, 2020, X and two other boys were involved in an event related to firearms. Shots were fired towards the school.

X admits that at a certain point, the gun was aimed at a female teenager, that she was threatened, and finally that a shot was fired in the air next to her. [ 5 ] Following this incident, X was suspended from school and, at the hearing, he has not reintegrated it yet. [ 6 ] Both parents seem to be very concerned with the situation of their child and collaborate with the school and the Justice Department in order to get help. [ 7 ] Consequences were given to the child at home. [ 8 ] X must realize that this incident could have had much more serious consequences and that firearms are no toys for young people. [ 9 ] The applicant insists on meeting the child alone, without the presence of the mother, in order to make some progress with X, which is accepted by both parents and X. [ 10 ] X is currently participating in a healing circle and has two more sessions to attend in order to reintegrate school. [ 11 ] The parents are willing to get all the help they need in order to solve the behavioural disturbances of X.

[ 12 ] The recommendations made by the applicant are in the best interest of the youth.

FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 13 ] GRANTS the application; [ 14 ] REVIEWS AND EXTENDS the judgment rendered on May 19, 2020; [ 15 ] MAINTAINS that the security and development of X, born on [...], 2008, are still endangered; [ 16 ] ENTRUSTS the child to his parents; [ 17 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling and assistance to the youth and his parents for a period of one year; [ 18 ] TAKES NOTICE that the parents agree that X meet the Social Worker alone; [ 19 ] ORDERS X to respect home and school rules; [ 20 ] ORDERS X not to consume tobacco or cannabis; [ 21 ] ORDERS the parents and the youth to fully collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection and meet the worker upon request; [ 22 ] ORDERS the parents to seek help for X in order that he receive all necessary health and social services needed by his situation; [ 23 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to obtain and share information with the professional providing services to the family regarding attendance, collaboration and evolution of their clients; [ 24 ] MAINTAINS all other conclusions contained in the judgment rendered on May 19, 2020, that are not obsolete or in contradiction with the present judgment; [ 25 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of the Court order. __________________________________ LUCILLE CHABOT, J.C.Q.

Mtre. Adelia Ferreira Counsel for the applicant Mtre. Yan Massé Centre communautaire juridique A Counsel for the child Mtre. Michel Grenier Counsel for the parents Date of hearing: December 7, 2020