2021 QCCQ 11683, 2021 QCCQ 11683

Protection de la jeunesse — 216713 2021 QCCQ 11683 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] Youth Division No: 614-41-000672-214; 614-41-000671-216 DATE: September 8, 2021 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE LUCILLE CHABOT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection Worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A Applicant And X, born on [...], 2018 And Y, born on [...], 2020 Children And A Mother And B Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 of the Youth Protection Act, ch.

P-34.1 CQLR ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 submits applications asking the court to review and extend a Court decision rendered by judge Lucie Godin, J.C.Q., on March 23, 2021, ordering the placement of the children in a foster home for a period of six months, that is to say until September 23, 2021. [ 2 ] The mother stated that she was on her way to the courthouse, but she never showed up. Mtre.

Marie-Michelle Grenier, who represents the mother, considers having a valid mandate to represent his client in her absence. [ 3 ] As for the father, he received copy of the applications two days before the Court and requests that the delay of service be reduced to two days. The Director tried to serve the father the week before but could not find him, as he was not home, drinking elsewhere. When the father received the documents on September 6, he declared that he wouldn’t be in court because he had to go work.

The Court reduces the delay of service and will proceed in his absence. [ 4 ] Most of the allegations of the application are admitted by the mother. The revision report is filed as evidence. [ 5 ] Since the last judgment, the parents have not taken any steps in order to solve their substance abuse problems. [ 6 ] Twice in August, the children had to be removed from their care during access rights because of the parents’ drinking. [ 7 ] The mother admits that she did not attend a treatment program.

She states that she went to A centre, but when verified by the Social Worker, there was no evidence of her attendance. [ 8 ] So, the parents are basically at the same point they were at in March. The parents must realize that the children cannot be put on hold for a long time.

They are at a crossroad: either they take steps in order to solve their issues on a permanent basis or the Director of Youth Protection will have to consider life plans for the children. [ 9 ] The parents must collaborate with the Social Worker with transparency and honesty in order to improve their parental skills and regain custody of the children. [ 10 ] The mother does not challenge the recommendations of the Social Worker and Mtre.

Fanny Wylde, who acts on behalf of both children, is of the opinion that these recommendations are in the best interest of her young clients. [ 11 ] The Court shares this point of view.

FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 12 ] GRANTS the applications; [ 13 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X, born on [...], 2018, and Y, born on [...], 2020 are still endangered; [ 14 ] ORDERS the placement of the children in foster families for a period of six months without any reintegration; [ 15 ] ORDERS that access rights between the parents and the children be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for the frequency, modalities and the presence of a third person if requested; [ 16 ] ORDERS that aid, counselling and assistance be provided to the children and the parents for a period of six months; [ 17 ] ORDERS the parents to attend a treatment program for substance abuse in the best delays and to follow all the recommendations made by the professionals; [ 18 ] ORDERS the parents to be and remain sober at all times when in the presence of the children and not to put them in presence of people who are under the influence of any intoxicating substances; [ 19 ] ORDERS the parents not to expose the children to any form of violence; [ 20 ] ORDERS the parents fully collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection, meet the worker upon request and to inform the worker of any change in their situation; [ 21 ] RECOMMENDS that a life plan be crafted for the children if the parents do not take steps in order to solve their issues; [ 22 ] AUTHORIZES that the Director of Youth Protection obtain and share information with all service providers working with the family as for attendance, participation and collaboration; [ 23 ] ORDERS any peace officer to collaborate with the execution of the Court orders if requested to do so by the Director of Youth Protection of one of its representatives; [ 24 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of the Court orders. __________________________________ LUCILLE CHABOT, J.C.Q.

Mtre. Adelia Ferreira Ferreira Lempicka Attorneys Lawyer for the applicant Mtre. Fanny Wylde Legal Aid A Lawyer for the children Mtre. Marie-Michellle Grenier André Levasseur Avocats Lawyer for the mother Date of hearing: September 8, 2021