2013 QCCQ 9932, 2013 QCCQ 9932

Protection de la jeunesse — 132751 2013 QCCQ 9932 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 635-41-000275-096 DATE: March 18, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the AC.Y.P.C. working in A Town Applicant -and- X, residing and domiciled in A Town, Quebec, district A Youth -and- A, residing and domiciled in A Town, Quebec, district A Mother -and- B, residing and domiciled in B Town, Quebec, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Sec. 95 (par. 1) and 75 of the Youth Protection Act) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection makes an application for the extension and the review of a decision rendered by J.

Bigué concerning, X, born on […], 1997. [ 2 ] The parents were duly notified and are not present. The adolescent is present and represented by counsel. She agrees with the proposed measures. THE FACTS [ 3 ] The Director of Youth Protection has been involved in the family's life since 2009. On August 11, 2009, J. Roy declared the security and development of the youth endangered due to the mother's excessive consumption of alcohol and her way of life. The youth was then entrusted to a foster family for a period of six months. [ 4 ] On March 30, 2010, J.

Leduc ordered that X be entrusted to her mother provided she collaborate with the Youth Protection worker and that she abstain from consuming alcohol and drugs in front of X and her siblings. In October 19, 2010, Leduc J. took notice of the mother's difficulty to change her ways as to her alcohol consumption and thus her inability to provide X with a secure, stable and structured home environment. For her part, X developed a sense of despair and expressed it by behavioural problems.

A psychiatric report highlighted the fact that X suffered from symptoms of a serious depression and recommended a psychological follow-up in order to help the youth develop trust in relationships. Accordingly, J. Leduc entrusted the youth to a rehabilitation centre for a period of one year. On October 4, 2011, J. Bédard implemented a draft agreement following which the youth continued to be entrusted to a rehabilitation center for another six months. [ 5 ] At the end of those measures, X's behaviour was improving to the point that on March 27, 2012, J.

Legault entrusted X to a rehabilitation center for a short period followed by her integration in a foster family or with her family, if the situation allowed it. [ 6 ] On September 18, 2012, J. Bigué was convinced that the return of the youth with neither her mother nor her father was possible considering the lack of improvement in their lives and considering the poor bond between X and each of her parents. X's stay in a rehabilitation center helped her develop the necessary skills in order to live in a family like environment. Thus, J.

Bigué ordered that the youth be entrusted to a foster family in order to clarify a life project. [ 7 ] We are now at the end of the measures ordered by J. Bigué. The parents' situation remains about the same. The father is hardly

involved in X's life. As for the mother, she clearly expressed wanting nothing to do with the Director of Youth Protection. Notwithstanding many attempts made by the Youth Protection worker to contact the mother, she refuses to meet with anyone. Her absence at the hearing tends to confirm her refusal to take an active

part in the process put into place to help her daughter. [ 8 ] In light of the foregoing and after consultation of the decisions previously rendered, the Court is convinced that there is little expectation that the parents' situation will change from a mid to long-term perspective. Consequently, the Court is of the opinion that the security and development of the youth remain endangered. MEASURES APPLICABLE [ 9 ] The Director of Youth Protection asks for an extension of the placement of the youth in a foster family for a period of six months.

The youth agrees with this recommendation. [ 10 ] It is important to underline that X has made tremendous progress in many aspects of her life. She is a model student and enjoys taking

part in the A activities. She is also part of the A group. [ 11 ] This being said, X has developed trust issues because of her difficult past. The youth has been in the same foster family for seven months now. Although the foster family provides X with a safe and loving environment, the youth has yet to establish a solid bond with her foster parents. The foster family is willing to care for X until her majority but admits that on some levels the communication with the youth remains difficult. X is somewhat ambivalent as to where she wants to live.

She is drawn to C Town as she enjoys everything that revolves around fashion and she sometimes misses living in the A Town group home. She is nevertheless willing to stay with her present foster family. [ 12 ] The applicant is very much aware of the youth's needs and is ready to offer support and guidance to the youth and the foster family in the hope that with time a stronger bond will develop with the foster family. The youth as developed a relationship of trust with educators from the A Town group home.

The applicant is also willing to put X into contact with some of them as the youth feels she can confide in them. [ 13 ] The maximum period of placement provided at

section 91.1 of the Youth Protection Act has been reached. The youth has the right to stable and continuous living conditions. However, the Court believes it must take things at X's pace, as she needs more time to establish a solid bond with her foster family. Under the circumstances, the Court believes it is in the best interest of the youth to disregard the maximum period of placement. The Court also agrees with the parties that everything has to be done in order to maximize the youth's chances to live in a family like environment.

In that sense, the proposed measures will allow to further clarify the youth's life project. [ 14 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 15 ] GRANTS the petition; [ 16 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X, born on […], 1997, are still endangered; [ 17 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted in a foster family for a period of six months; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the youth and her parents be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for frequency and modalities; [ 19 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the youth, her parents and the foster family for a period of six months; [ 20 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the youth be afforded the opportunity to confide in educators from the A Town rehabilitation center; [ 21 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate in the execution of the present order; [ 22 ] ENTRUSTS the youth's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing the measures ordered by the Court. __________________________________ NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q.

M e Gabriel Gaudreault Cain Lamarre Casgrain Wells Lawyer for the D.Y.P. M e Myriame Gaudreault Legal Aid A Lawyer for the youth Date of hearing: March 5, 2013