2017 QCCQ 13663, 2017 QCCQ 13663

Protection de la jeunesse — 176019 2017 QCCQ 13663 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 525-41-032308-173 DATE: August 15 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE LINE BACHAND, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF THE YOUTH PROTECTION OF THE CIUSSS A X Born on [...], 2012 child and A B parents JUDGMENT

Section 95 L.P.J. 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 Court hereby confirms and provides written reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing regarding X, born on [...], 2012.

This hearing has begun on June 26 2017 and has been continued on August 15 2017. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection (the Director), presents an Application to declare that the security or the development of X is in danger. [ 3 ] The Director submits that the child is in a situation in which his basic educational and physical needs are not met (section 38 b 1iii) and

i) of the Youth Protection Act [1] ). The Director also submits that the child is seriously or repeatedly subjected to behaviour on the part of his mother that could cause harm to him (

section 38

c) of the Youth Protection Act [2] ). [ 4 ] To correct the situation, the Director recommends essentially that X be entrusted to the foster home of his maternal grandmother, Ms. C, with a social follow up as well as additional measures, for a period of one year. [ 5 ] The father’s address is unknown. Considering that he is uninvolved in the child’s life, the Court decided to proceed in his absence. [ 6 ] At the onset of the proceeding, the duration of the measures were contested by the mother. She consented to the measures recommended by the Director for a duration of 6 months.

The mother also asked to have three contacts per week with her son and wished to have more eventually. She seeked a prohibition of contact between the child’s maternal uncle, Mr. D. She agreed to authorize the Director to exchange pertinent informations with treating professionnals working with the family concerning her attendance but not about the content of her meetings with them. [ 7 ] The social worker testified on June 26 and on August 15. Her Court reports [3] and other documents were filed as documentary evidence. [ 8 ] The maternal grandmother was also heard on June 26. She agreed not to let her son, Mr.

D in contact with X. During her testimony, the grandmother undertook not to denigrate the mother.

CONTEXT AN ANALYSIS [ 9 ] On February 24, 2017, X had marijuana in his hand after being brought to day-care by his mother. [ 10 ] The child exhibits behaviour problems. He is physically and verbally aggressive. When the social worker met him, he said that sometimes he steals the toys from school because he doesn’t have any at his mother’s home.

He explained that he makes sure not to tell his mom because she yells at him. [ 11 ] On June 26, 2017, the Director established the following allegations of the Application: « 3.1 the child is seriously or repeatedly subjected to behaviour on the part of the mother that could cause him harm, and the mother fails to take necessary steps to correct the situation; 3.2 the mother frequently screams at the child; 3.3 the mother calls the child a thief and a manipulator; 3.4 the mother speaks to the child as if he was an adult; 3.5 the mother consumes marijuana on a regular and frequent basis; 3.6 the child recently had a small bag of marijuana in his hand as he arrived at daycare; 3.7 the mother was recently assessed for mental health issues but does not trust the recommendations made by the professionals; 3.8 the child demonstrates serious behavioural problems in the mother’s care; 3.9 the mother fails to meet the child’s basic physical needs; 3.10 the mother lives in the semi-supervised setting of 03 (On Our Own); 3.11 the mother’s home is cluttered and the kitchen is unhygienic; 3.12 the child does not have proper bed or bedcovers; 3.13 there is minimal or inappropriate food in the home; 3.14 the home smells strongly of marijuana; 3.15 the mother have been given notice by 03 that she must leave the premises by May due to disruptive behaviour and drug use; 3.16 the maternal grandmother takes care of the child on a regular and frequent basis; 3.17 the child does not demonstrate the same behavioural problems in the maternal grandmother’s care; 3.18 there is ongoing conflict between the mother and the maternal grandmother regarding the lack of appropriate care provided by the mother; 3.19 the maternal grandmother has all necessary items for the child’s well-being; 3.20 the maternal grandmother is willing to have the child entrusted to her care for as long as deemed necessary; 3.21 the father is uninvolved. ʺ [ 12 ] Consequently, on June 26, the Court decided to declare that the security or development of the child is compromised under

Section 38 b) 1 i), 38 b) 1 ii) and 38

c) of the Youth Protection Act . [ 13 ] On August 15, the mother was in agreement with the measures proposed by the Director. She asked the Court to hear Ms. Karine Milard, an educator who is working with her. [ 14 ] It was important for Ms. A to testify. She explained her point of view concerning her past but also about what she’s willing to do to improve herself as a person and as a mother. [ 15 ] The mother explained that she was diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. She said that she decided to change her life when she learned that she was pregnant of her son.

Knowing her diagnosis helped her understand her behaviour with her son and why she had the feeling that her life was like a roller coaster. Her testimony confirms what the social worker explained when she said that there is a pattern were the mother can do well for a certain period of time and then get disorganised very quickly. [ 16 ] The mother recognizes that she has to take care of herself if she wants to have a better relationship with her son. She accepts to work on her parental skills.

She understands that she has to be consistant with the professionals that are working with her, even when she feels that she’s doing well. [ 17 ] The Court concludes that the mother understands her mental issues well. She wants to be reunited with X as soon as possible but she knows that she has to work hard on herself to reach this goal. [ 18 ] The relationship between the mother and the grandmother is conflictual since many years.

[ 19 ] The Director has established that the grandmother is actually able to respond to the child’s needs. [ 20 ] The behaviour of X has improved since he is entrusted to her. The Director has the intention to keep the child with her as a foster home. [ 21 ] Considering that it is in the interest of the child to keep him in this family environment because the child has a significant relationship with her, the Court will entrust X to his grandmother.

The Court will take judicial notice that the grandmother is recognized as a foster home for X. [ 22 ] The testimony of the social worker and the documentary evidence established the necessity of respecting the rhythm of the child as well as the mother. [ 23 ] The mother testified that she wants to be the mother that X can trust. To reach this objective, she will have to behave in a way to build this trust. She has all the support that she needs, she has the intelligence and the will to do so but she will have to put efforts in this goal on a consistent basis.

During the time that it will take, she will have to put her conflicts with her mother aside for the best interest of X. [ 24 ] CONSEQUENTLY, FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 25 ] GRANTS the Application; [ 26 ] DECLARES that the security or development of X is in danger under

section 38 b) 1 iii) and b) 1

i) and

c) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 27 ] AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE INTEREST OF X, TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 28 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to his grandmother, Ms. C; [ 29 ] TAKES JUDICIAL notice that the grandmother is recognized as a foster family for this child; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between X and his mother be determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 31 ] ORDERS that the mother follow the recommendations emanating from the Parental Capacity Assessment (e.g. individual psychological therapy for Ms.

A to address emotional and drug use regulation, psycho-education regarding parental skills, and individual psychological therapy to be offered to X to help him address his issues); [ 32 ] RECOMMENDS that Ms. A continue to take steps to address her personal issues and report her progress to the Director of Youth Protection; [ 33 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to exchange pertinent information with treating professionnals working with the family; [ 34 ] PROHIBITS the contacts between the child and the maternal uncle, Mr.

D; [ 35 ] RECOMMENDS the Director to encourage and favorise the contacts between the child and her mother; [ 36 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to X and his family for a period of one (1) year. [ 37 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection of the CIUSSS A who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ Line BACHAND, J.C.Q. Me Nadia SABIK Director’s Attorney Me Laurence MARCEAU Child’s attorney Me Lilian STAH Mother’s attorney Dates of hearing: June 26, 2017 and August 15, 2017