r v. A, 2016 QCCQ 6487

Protection de la jeunesse — 162655 2016 QCCQ 6487 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-41-005042-166 DATE: March 8, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X Born: [...], 2011 Child ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] The Director of Youth Protection presents a motion for protection concerning the child X, alleging that her security and development are in danger in reason of neglect of health care, serious risk of neglect and psychological ill-treatment. [ 2 ] While maintaining the child in her family environment, the Director seeks the application of various measures of aid and counsel for one year. [ 3 ] The parents consign their admissions as well as their agreement with the orientation proposed by the Director. [ 4 ] The child’s attorney operates in virtue of a legal mandate.

After considering the evidence, she consents to the conclusions sought by the Director as corresponding to her client’s best interests. [ 5 ] Analysis and decision [ 6 ] The child resides in the care of her parents. The mother is the primary caregiver as she remains home with her daughter. The father is present, but works long hours at his employment. [ 7 ] The Director of Youth Protection evaluates the situation of the child in autumn 2015. The father is collaborative with the evaluation process.

The mother is more restrained and often disagrees with the father and the interventions of the case worker. [ 8 ] Born with congenital malformations requiring the use of a catheter and a colostomy, X requires specific and constant attention to her medical needs. [ 9 ] Until October 2015, X has the use of a temporary catheter in order to urinate, with instructions to change the bag every four hours.

The parents admit to not having faithfully respected this, oftentimes not changing her medical equipment for 8 hours or overnight. [ 10 ] Around the month of November 2015, there is an important degeneration in the child’s health. The medical professionals opine that it is possible that if the catheter had been changed as required, there may have not been a decline of the child’s kidney function. [ 11 ] In order to promote healing her renal function, a permanent catheter is put in place.

Although his catheter requires less maintenance, the parents still struggle to respect the doctor’s recommendations. [ 12 ] The ideal solution being a temporary catheter, here will be a return such in the short term and it is then imperative that the parents be vigilant and rigorous as to her care in order to avoid further deterioration and concurrently, a higher risk for renal failure.

[ 13 ] The parties admit other problematic issues as to the family dynamic, affecting the child. [ 14 ] X is kept socially isolated and spends most of her days in the house alone with her mother. The father is often absent in reason of his work schedule, but is able to offer outside activities to his daughter. The Director suggests that the child benefit from daycare to promote her socialization and prepare her for school. [ 15 ] The parents offer little routine or structure to their child.

She has no set times for meals or bed time. [ 16 ] The parents have recurrent conflicts in the presence of the child, which can include physical confrontations. Concurrently, the mother can exhibit extreme reactive behaviours, such as uttering death threats to a neighbour, hiding in a closet and burning the father’s crucifix.

This is also reflected in her response to the Director’s interventions, when she shows impulsive reactions and repeatedly distances herself. [ 17 ] It is pertinent that the Director observes that the child has little reactions when confronted with her mother’s disturbing behaviours. [ 18 ] Since the Director’s involvement, the parents indicate to being more sensitive of the impacts of their arguments on their child and to making efforts to stabilize their situation.

The father acknowledges that counselling as to their relationship could be beneficial, but the mother is resistant to such a process. [ 19 ] The Court concludes that the security and the development of the child are in danger for the reasons brought forth by the Director. The mother’s emotional instability and tendency to prioritize her outbursts, in conjunction with the lack of socialization, constitute a serious risk of neglect. The parent’s inability to consistently respect their daughter’s medical needs correspond to a situation of health neglect.

Finally, the child being recurrently in presence of the parent’s conflictual relationship contributes to a situation of psychological ill-treatment. [ 20 ] The Court further endorses the measures put forth, which are the reflection of child's best interest, while concurrently receiving the approval of the parties. [ 21 ] FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 22 ] GRANTS the motion for protection; [ 23 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child are in danger for the following reasons: neglect health care, serious risk of neglect and psychological ill-treatment; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the child remain with her family; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 26 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and her family for a period of one year; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the child receive certain health care and health services, namely that her medical needs be are responded to, following the prescriptions of the health care professionals; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the child attend a childcare establishment assiduously as soon as a place is available and this, until she commences school; [ 29 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother undergo a psychological evaluation and follow the recommendations; [ 30 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents undergo a couples therapy; [ 31 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the judgment. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q.

Me Sarah Gaudry Staub Attorney for the Petitioner Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the child Date of hearing: March 8, 2016