2020 QCCQ 4262, 2020 QCCQ 4262

Protection de la jeunesse — 204123 JL5004 2020 QCCQ 4262 COURT OF QUEBEC « Youth Division » CANADA PROVINCE OF [...] DISTRICT OF [...] N°: 540-41-005908-206 DATE : MAY 4, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE LISA LEROUX, J.C.Q. [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth protection worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, Applicant And X Born on [...], 2011 Child And A B Parents JUDGMENT

Section 38 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 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.) [ 1 ] The Director of youth protection (Director) presents to the court a motion for protection in the child’s situation.

She is a 9 years old child and the Director considers her situation in danger by reason of educational neglect by her mother. [ 2 ] Essentially, the Director alleges that the mother shows some difficulties to set a constant and predictable routine for the child at home. Also, that the child can be left alone with her older brother, Y (11 years old) without supervision, but conflicts arise between them. Another concern is that the mother’s ex-boyfriend used inadequate educational means to intervene towards the child.

However, the mother did not inform the Director of this aspect of the situation. [ 3 ] The mother recognizes being overwhelmed by her daily parental responsibilities. She admits that the abovementioned situation has several impacts on the child’s development. For these reasons, she is in agreement with the Director’s implication. [ 4 ] The father is not involved in the child’s situation since 2016.

The Director tried on many occasions to reach him, but to no avail. [ 5 ] The child’s attorney is of the opinion that the Director’s intervention is necessary to ensure the security and development of the child and that the proposed measures are in her best interest. DECISION [ 6 ] The child lives with her mother and her older brother Y. [ 7 ] There is a lack of structure and consistent routine in the family environment. Despite the implication of the Director’s since 2016 for similar reasons (in the case of Y), the family’s situation keeps on deteriorating. [ 8 ] The mother is overwhelmed by her everyday life.

She says yes to receive some help, however, she does not apply the tools that are given to her. [ 9 ] Even if the mother affirms that she broke up with her spouse, Mr. C, she maintains regular contacts with him until December 2019 and their relationship is steeped with conflicts. Moreover, she acknowledges that some of Mr. C’s interventions towards the child have been inadequate and sometimes harsh, but she never told the Director.

It took a new report in December 2019 and interim measures from the court to make sure the child was safe. [ 10 ] It is only recently that the mother made some positives changes in her life to better respond to the child’s needs. She admits needing the help of the Director in order to consolidate the new routine so the child can feel safe and have more stability. [ 11 ] CONSEQUENTLY AND FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE TRIBUNAL : [ 12 ] GRANTS the motion for protection; [ 13 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are in danger under paragraph b) 1) iii) of

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 14 ] ENTRUSTS X to her mother; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the contacts between X and her father be established by agreement between the parties but TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE that there has been no contacts since 2017; [ 16 ] ORDERS that the mother actively participates in all the suggested measures in order to end the compromising situation; [ 17 ] ORDERS that the mother ensures that she or someone responsible supervises and accompanies her daughter in her morning and after class routine; [ 18 ] FORBID the mother to leave the child alone in the presence of Mr.

C and forbid the latter to intervene towards the child; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the mother reports regularly to the DYP to inform of the evolution of the situation; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the exercise of certain parental authority be withdrawn from the father regarding healthcare and all school matters, and entrusts these attributes to the mother; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the DYP inform the father of his daughters evolution so long has he collaborates with youth protection; [ 22 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and the child’s family; [ 23 ] THE WHOLE, for a period of 12 months; [ 24 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the DYP of CISSS A for the enforcement of this order;

May 20th, 2020 __________________________________ LISA LEROUX, J.C.Q. This is the written and reasoned version of the oral judgment handed down on May 4, 2020 in accordance with

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act . Mtre. Marie-Pier LORTIE Counsel for the Directeur de la protection de la jeunesse Mtre Anne LARIVIÈRE for Mtre. Éric OUELLETTE Counsel for the child Mtre Francois LEGAULT Counsel for the mother B Father LL/hl- tt