r v. A, 2018 QCCQ 11640

Protection de la jeunesse — 182026 2018 QCCQ 11640 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-41-005294-171 DATE: January 29, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X Born: [...], 2001 Adolescent ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION OF LE CENTRE JEUNESSE A Petitioner v.

A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] In reason of his serious behavioral disturbances, on April 4, 2017, the Court applies various protective measures for 9 months as well as entrusting the adolescent X to a rehabilitation center until August 30, 2017. [ 2 ] Alleging the pursuit of the situation of endangerment and a staggered evolution, the Director of Youth Protection seeks the revision of this last order, providing notably that the adolescent pursue a therapeutic intervention (Portage) in regards to his drug dependency, with the continuance of the social intervention for 9 months. [ 3 ] The adolescent and his mother subscribes to the Director’s evaluation and orientation.

The Court proceeds in the father’s absence, as he is served and notifies his agreement to the caseworker. [ 4 ] The adolescent agrees to the situation of endangerment and the need for protective measures, but he considers that his placement is not warranted. Analysis and decision [ 5 ] As provided in the last order, the adolescent remains in a rehabilitation center until August 30, 2017, moment at which he returns to his maternal environment. [ 6 ] There is a rapid resurgence of his behavioural issues, namely his drug and alcohol use.

On October 12, his mother informs the caseworker that her son is being sought by other adolescents accusing him of stealing drugs. Two days later, he narrowly escapes an attempted knife attack, but refuses to have recourse to police authorities. [ 7 ] After being entrusted temporarily to his uncle, the adolescent voluntarily integrates the drug addiction rehabilitation center A , situation which is confirmed by a provisional order . He is progressing well with the program, although he remains fragile.

He considers leaving twice, but finally reconsiders. [ 8 ] The program is initially set for 6 months, although a two-month extension is possible should there be a need. Both parents agree that X needs to deal with his consumption issues before they will consider his reintegration home. [ 9 ] After evaluating the evidence, the Court is satisfied that the conclusions sought are the reflection of the adolescent’s best interests.

[ 10 ] Although X shows an ability to succeed and focus on adopting positive behaviours, durable change remains elusive, especially outside the confines of a structured environment. [ 11 ] Since October, the adolescent shows a renewed investment as to addressing his dependency issue by completing his therapy with A . As this seems to be a driving factor for his dysfunctional behaviours, the Court subscribes to the parties being able to agree to his transition back to his maternal environment as of the successful termination of this therapeutic process.

This vision is obviously conditional to X demonstrating an ability to maintain his sobriety and positive behaviours outside the confines of a structured environment.

FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 12 ] GRANTS the application; [ 13 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the adolescent are still in danger; [ 14 ] REVISES the Court order rendered on April 4, 2017; [ 15 ] ORDERS that Seth be entrusted in an institution operating a rehabilitation centre chosen by the Director of Youth Protection A for a period of 6 months; [ 16 ] PERMITS that upon agreement between the parties, the adolescent be integrated on a progressive or a fulltime basis in his maternal environment as of May 1, 2018; [ 17 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the adolescent and his parents be following mutual agreement between the parties; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and his parents take an active

part in the application of the measures; [ 19 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the adolescent and his family; [ 20 ] ALL THESE MEASURES for 9 months, save for the placement in the rehabilitation centre; [ 21 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the present judgment. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Anne-Catherine Bujold Attorney for the Applicant Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the adolescent Date of hearing: January 29, 2018