2020 QCCQ 3715, 2020 QCCQ 3715

Protection de la jeunesse — 203700 2020 QCCQ 3715 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 145-41-000620-192 DATE: June 5, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant -and- X born on [...], 2019 child -and- A -and- 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 (DYP) asks the Court to revise and extend the order rendered on October 8, 2019, in order to entrust the child to the mother. Her brother is aimed by the same proceedings. A joint hearing is held with the agreement of the parties. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the parents are absent, even if they were duly notified. However, the mother is represented by a lawyer as well as the child.

The facts of the demand are not contested nor the recommendations of the DYP. [ 3 ] Since the last measure, the mother receives support services for her personal issues and parental skills. At the beginning, she attends the meetings scheduled but a few months later she had difficulties keeping up with the appointments and often missed them. She explains that this is due to vehicle problems, the illness of her mother who recently passed away. Her financial situation was worrisome and caused her stress and anger.

Some services are added to help her, to provide notably, home support, parental skills, parental capacities, financial provision for food and daycare coverage. [ 4 ] The professional involved in this family fears that the mother will go back to her old ways. What is reassuring is that she recognizes her emotions and takes the initiative to ask for help when needed. She has a lot of support from her family. [ 5 ] Regarding the father, at the beginning of the measures, it was difficult to contact him but at some point, around September 2019 finally, he reached out.

Supervised visits were put in place because of his past inappropriate behaviour and the overall situation. However, it only began on January 2020 since many problems arise on the process notably, the difficulty to reach him due to a change of phone number plus he did not have an appropriate accommodation to receive the child. Just one visit occurs on February 2020, between them. [ 6 ] Starting March 2020, two visits per week were put in place. Everything goes accordingly and he is very attentive towards his daughter’s needs. About the professional services, he is still waiting for them.

He knows that a lot of work still has to be done but wishes to be involved in his daughter’s life and is willing to collaborate with the DYP. [ 7 ] There are allegations that the parents have addiction issues which they both deny. There is no evidence at this stage of these facts. Their relationship is tense and dotted with ups and downs. They accuse each other of stalking the other.

The mother wants the father to be involved in the child’s life, still a certain apprehension and fear remains. [ 8 ] Even if in the past months, the mother had a few setbacks, we cannot put aside that she wants to improve and make the necessary efforts to do so. She mobilizes herself to make positive changes in her life and is actively involved in it. She even got a bigger

apartment for the family. She is aware that she has to stabilize her situation and presently requires a lot of support but things are evolving positively. The DYP makes surprise visits at her home, there is nothing to say and she is very receptive to it. [ 9 ] Despite everything, the mother is able to provide to the child a loving and secure home with all the supports she gets. Her willingness to change her path is a sign that she is trying hard, to do things in a better way for them. [ 10 ] Overall, the evidence demonstrates that the security and development of the adolescent are still in danger.

Considering this, as well as the absence of contestation of the measures suggested by the DYP, which appears to be in the best interest of the child. FOR THESE REASONS AND THOSE EXPRESSED ORALLY AT THE HEARING, THE COURT: [ 11 ] GRANT the amended application for revision and extension of order; [ 12 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still considered to be in danger, according to

section 38 of the Youth protection act ; [ 13 ] REVISES AND EXTENDS the court rendered on October 8, 2019, in the present file; [ 14 ] ORDERS the child be entrusted to her mother; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the parents reports whenever required by the DYP on the measures they apply to themselves or to the child to put an end to the situation that compromises the security of development of the child; [ 16 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and her father be determined according to agreement between the parties; [ 17 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents actively participate in the follow-up with an addictions counsellor if deemed necessary; [ 18 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents actively participate in psychological counselling to help deal with their personal issues; [ 19 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents participate in anger management and parental capacity assessments; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the parents actively participate in the application of the measures ordered; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the person working in an organization or institution brings to the child as well as his family, help, advice and support until June 30, 2021; [ 22 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the DYP of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A for the carrying out of the present judgment. __________________________________ CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q.

Me Louyse A. Lemieux for the applicant Me Jules Grenier for the adolescent Me Ann-Chloé Boudreau for the mother Mr. B (absent) the father Written judgment filed on June 11, 2020