2018 QCCQ 13799, 2018 QCCQ 13799

Protection de la jeunesse — 1810802 2018 QCCQ 13799 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 635-41-000456-126 DATE: October 31, 2018 (written judgment rendered on January 11, 2019) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2001 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...] Applicant and C, residing and domiciled at [...] Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 a decision rendered on February 1, 2018, regarding the youth X, born on [...], 2001.

At that date, the Court declared the security and development still in danger and entrusted the youth to her mother until January 31, 2019. [ 2 ] The DYP asks the Court to entrust the youth to a rehabilitation centre with a reintegration in a foster family if the situation allows it, until May 15, 2019. [ 3 ] The mother is present and represented by Me Léonard. She recognizes that the security and development of the youth are still in danger but she contests the measures. She wants her daughter to be entrusted to a foster family. [ 4 ] The youth is present and represented by Me Neptune.

She recognizes that their security and development are still in danger and, as her mother, she contests the measures. She wants to be entrusted to an extended family member. Historical situation [ 5 ] On April 11, 2012 , the situation of X was submitted to the Court. At that time, she was ten years old. Her mother had alcohol consumption issues and was frequently fighting with her sister, D. She also had difficulty to provide food to X and her two siblings. The mother hit her children and admitted being overwhelmed with the situation.

X mentioned to her teacher that she wishes to have a new family because in her house they are fighting, yelling, drinking and they are mad people. Justice Roy declared that the security and development of the child were in danger [1] , entrusted her to a foster family for six months with a possibility of reintegration with the mother if the situation allows it. [ 6 ] On October 16, 2012 , Justice Bigué noted that the mother’s situation drastically deteriorated.

After three weeks offering a good collaboration, she left for City A with her new boyfriend and her consumption of drugs and alcohol increased bringing her to be hospitalized. She still had financial difficulties, and her personal hygiene was neglected. X was still in the same foster family in City B and she was doing very well. The Court entrusted her to a foster family for a period of six months. [ 7 ] On May 28, 2013 , the mother was still in City A and her personal situation remained the same.

She did not collaborate with the DYP worker and she was unclear about the project to stay in City A or to move back to City C. She had very irregular contact with X and her siblings and it was always over the phone. After being placed in five different foster families since March 22, 2012, X is now entrusted to her uncle E. She was doing very well. Justice Bigué entrusted her with her uncle for six months with a view to preparing a permanent life plan for her. [ 8 ] On January 28, 2014 , the situation of the mother continued to deteriorate. She was not reachable until few days before the court hearing.

She received the application but she destroyed it and did not come. X was maintained at her uncle’s place with her sister. The two girls have very strong bonds. The DYP was supposed to prepare a life plan but the uncle is often overwhelmed by the responsibilities and he is difficult to be reached. X’s behaviour deteriorated since the last order. She mentioned not being well at her

uncle’s place and she would like to go to her grandmother’s place. She was evaluated to foster her but has not been retained as a suitable place. The DYP needed to continue to look for a place for X knowing that it’s important to keep the two sisters together. The Court entrusted her to a foster family for a period of six months. [ 9 ] On October 16, 2014 , the Court noted that X stayed at her uncle’s place.

She improved her behaviour at school since the last order and won an award at the end of the school year for “the most improved student.” X stayed with the perception that her uncle did not want to take care of her and the Court underlines the importance to evaluate if the uncle is committed to take care of his niece on a long term basis. The situation of the mother remained the same, and she was still in City A. The Court entrusted X to a foster family (uncle) until June 17, 2015. [ 10 ] On June 16, 2015 , the DYP asked to prolong another time the placement at the uncle’s place to verify his implication.

His collaboration was irregular and he said he did not need the DYP in his life to take care of his niece. A recent event of conjugal violence with his girlfriend made him more open with the DYP services. The mother was still in City A, she was facing criminal charges but she announced her intention to go to treatment for her alcohol and drug addiction issues on following August. The Court entrusted X to a foster family, namely Mr. E (her uncle) until October 16, 2015.

The Court also orders that X receive specific health care and services regarding the vulnerability of her lungs. [ 11 ] On October 15, 2015 , the DYP asked to prolong another time the placement at the uncle’s place. The mother was detained. X said being well at her uncle’s place but would rather go to her grandmother’s place at City D. The uncle, E, was taking care of X (13 years old) and her siblings Y (8 years old), Z (16 years old) and A (11 years old). The two last ones were adopted by Ms. D (maternal aunt) who was under a tutorship. She was also living with E.

The uncle lived difficult moments with his girlfriend, but the situation was getting better. The Court noted that he was doing his best. It was not easy for him and he needs to be supported. The Court entrusted X to a foster family, namely Mr. E. [ 12 ] On October 14, 2016 , the mother was back in City B and lived at the uncle’s place. Some events of violence occurred between her and her boyfriend in the presence of the child. X attended school regularly and was doing very well. The Court entrusted her to the foster family of Mr.

E until her age of majority. [ 13 ] On February 1, 2018 , the Court was seized with the motion for revision. The uncle disengaged himself in August 2017. Ms. F took care of X but still at the same house in the presence of the mother. X was evaluated in regard to behavioural issues, substance abuse and inappropriate sexual behaviours. She was pregnant and did not attend school regularly. That being said she met weekly with the addiction counsellor and the social worker, and she was also attending all her appointments with the midwife and the clinic. The mother made lots of improvement.

She maintained her sobriety, she worked and provided for her children. She registered herself to go to a family addiction treatment centre in [province A] in April 2018 with X and her sister. The Court entrusted X to her mother until January 31, 2019. Facts [ 14 ] X will turn 17 years old soon. She gave birth to B on [...], 2018. Her daughter is now six months old and since her birth she was entrusted to a foster family and with X when she was in a treatment centre in [province A]. [ 15 ] During her pregnancy, X did not consume alcohol but consume marijuana.

As before, she continued her meetings with the addiction counsellor and was registered to a treatment centre with her mother in June 2018. [ 16 ] On May 13, 2018, she was arrested by police for assault on her biological brother, A, while she was intoxicated by alcohol. She felt remorse and promised not to consume anymore. [ 17 ] At that time, even if she was supposed to live at her mother’s place, she spent most of the time at her boyfriend’s place, B’s father. On May 22, 2018, her boyfriend assaulted her and she left with her baby and went to her uncle’s place, E.

Few days later, she came back at her boyfriend’s place with the baby. [ 18 ] Ms. G, X’s aunt, accepted to take care of her and the baby, but another time, a few days after X was found to her boyfriend. [ 19 ] On beginning of June 2018, X assaulted her brother and two days after, she admitted her alcohol consumption three times a week.

Immediate protective measures were taken, and X was entrusted to a rehabilitation centre. [ 20 ] On June 14, 2018, Justice Descôteaux entrusted X to a rehabilitation centre and she stayed at [Center A] in City A. [ 21 ] On June 20, 2018, X filed a provisional measure application to modify the previous one and to be authorized to attend a treatment centre in [province A]. The Court allowed her to attend this treatment and ordered that she return to the rehabilitation centre right after. [ 22 ] On June 24, 2018, she went to a Treatment centre in [province A] with her baby as scheduled.

She asked her boyfriend to come to work on their relationship. After hesitation and missing his plane, he finally arrived. The workers at the centre reported that they were arguing all the time and did not participate well. He assaulted X and he was told that no other violent event would be tolerated. He finally leaves by himself on July 17, 2018. X stayed there but did not graduate. [ 23 ] On July 25, 2018, X and her boyfriend are back together and X admits having suicidal ideation. [ 24 ] When X went back to City B on October 13, 2018, an [origin A] foster family was available to receive her and her child.

The foster mother clearly expressed the rules at her place and indicated that she really wants to help X to raise B according to the [origin A] culture. [ 25 ] Unfortunately, X ran away the same day with the baby. She was found out two days after. She was entrusted to another foster

family without her baby. She ran away a few hours later, and she never came back. [ 26 ] On October 17, 2018, X was entrusted to the Group Home in City B. The first day, she went to school and she found a job as a cashier, but after her shift she never came back at the Group Home.

She ran away for two weeks until the date of the hearing when she shows up at the courthouse by herself. [ 27 ] Questioned by the Tribunal about the reason why she was found only two weeks after, the DYP worker explains that a colleague of her was in contact few times with X’s mother who known where she was but nothing was done to pick up X and bring her back to the Group Home. Also X and her mother were seen on an ATV by the DYP worker but it was during the weekend so she did not intervene. [ 28 ] X testified and said that she was at her aunt to take care of her.

D is on tutorship and she needs help because some people live at her place without authorization and they abuse her. [ 29 ] X asks to be entrusted with her daughter to her aunt, Ms. H. She would like to organize a women’s healing circle at the church. She participated in a healing circle in [province A] and she appreciated. She would like to organize it to share with other women in City B.

She is sad because according to her, the DYP worker did not permit her or gave her the chance to organize it. [ 30 ] The youth also indicated that she gave names of people in City B who would be available to foster her and her baby but no verification was made to evaluate those people. Ms. H testifies and confirms that she is ready to foster her niece and B and that she was never called by the DYP to verify if she could foster X. [ 31 ] The hearing started on October 30, 2018, and continued on October 31, to allow Ms. H to testify.

The Court ordered to X to go to the Group Home for the night, but she ran away after the Court. The DYP worker did not know where she slept, but she arrived by herself at time at the courthouse on October 31. [ 32 ] Regarding the mother, since the last order, her collaboration with the DYP services decreased.

As the treatment program in [province A] was postponed from April to June because B was too young, the mother’s motivation diminished and she was less regular to her meetings with the addiction counsellor. [ 33 ] She was arrested for possession of a weapon in dangerous purposes and uttering threats on her sister D and stay detained two days. She was released with the specific condition not to go to the family house, so she had nowhere to go. She decided to move to City A and she relapsed.

She missed her plane to go to [province A] with her daughter, another plane ticket was booked but she also missed it because she was intoxicated. [ 34 ] X expresses being affected by the fact that her mother moved back to City A, consuming and not taking care of her and her siblings. Analysis [ 35 ] X is only 16 years old, and she took steps to entrust a treatment centre in [province A] with her baby. She went there twice. It’s very far from her village, and she was there alone with her baby. The Court is impressed to see that X seized the Court under

section 76.1 of the Youth Protection Act to ask to modify the order rendered by Justice Descôteaux to be authorized to go there.

Even if the DYP is involved in X’s life, he did not seize the Court for that. [ 36 ] X took care of her baby alone at the treatment centre, and no evidence was provided regarding the neglect. [ 37 ] Since she went back from [province A], even if no evidence of neglect on her child was presented, it’s obvious that X seems to forget that she is only 16 years old and that she needs structure for herself. [ 38 ] The evidence shows that as the placement in foster family was not a success, the placement in Group Home was not a success either. [ 39 ] B has strong bonds with X and it is the time for them to continue to develop this infant-parent bonding.

The DYP agrees to maintain very frequent contacts in the way to continue to develop this bond. [ 40 ] X explains the reason why she ran away from the foster families. She misses her family members, and she wants to be close to them. She wants to help her aunt, D who is under a tutorship. She wants to be implicated in traditional activities. She indicates having kicked out the people known to consume alcohol and drugs who used to come at her aunt because she is not able to intervene by herself. [ 41 ] X has good skills and the treatment in [province A] seems been beneficial for her.

She asks the opportunity to show that she is able to respect the rules. [ 42 ] The Court trusts the adolescent and understand that when she went back from [province A], where she missed her family members, it was important for her to reconnect and to spend time with them. Her choices were not the best because she put herself and the baby in danger but nothing wrong happened and no evidence shows that the baby was neglected during that time.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 43 ] GRANTS partially the application; [ 44 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the youth X, born on [...], 2001, are still in danger; [ 45 ] ENTRUSTS X to Ms. H’s place;

[ 46 ] ORDERS X and her mother to take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 47 ] ORDER that X receive help and services regarding drugs and alcohol consumption and personal issues on a weekly basis; [ 48 ] ORDERS X and Ms. H to meet with the Youth Protection worker to establish written house rules which include at least curfew, whereabouts, people with whom X may associate and consequences of breaking those rules. The Director of Youth Protection will file a copy of the rules in the court’s record as soon as possible; [ 49 ] ORDER that the services of an external educator be provided to X and Ms.

H; [ 50 ] ORDER the mother to remain sober in the presence of X; [ 51 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother continue to address her substance abuse problem; [ 52 ] ORDERS X to attend school or any other place of learning on a regular basis; [ 53 ] ENCOURAGES X to continue her project to organize a women’s healing circle in City B; [ 54 ] AUTHORIZES the exchange of information between the Director of Youth Protection and the professionals implicated in the life of X regarding the presence and the involvement in the follow-ups; [ 55 ] ORDER that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid counselling or assistance to X, Ms.

H and the mother until January 31, 2019, [ 56 ] ORDERS any police force to collaborate with the execution of the Court order if requested to do so by the Director of Youth Protection or one of his representatives; [ 57 ] ENTRUSTS X’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of this order. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q. Me Geneviève Apollon, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Me Marianne Léonard, attorney for the mother Dates of hearing: October 30 and 31, 2018