2017 QCCQ 18493, 2017 QCCQ 18493

Protection de la jeunesse — 178919 2017 QCCQ 18493 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001542-122 DATE: November 6, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 2004 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of A Applicant and A, residing and domiciled in […] Mother and B, residing and domiciled in […] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (sections 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 ] Mrs. [Social Worker 1], delegate duly authorised by the Director of Youth Protection of A (D.Y.P.) seizes the Court with a motion in revision of the last judgment rendered on July 25, 2016 concerning X, 13 years old.

She asks for another placement in a reception centre for 12 months, followed by a placement in the specific foster family, the aunt, until her majority. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the mother and the youth are present, represented by Me Michel Grenier and Me Constantin Kiryakidis. The father is detained but also represented by Me Grenier.

Me Adelia Ferreira represents the applicant. [ 3 ] Evidence of the new allegations in support of such placement is constituted of the admissions made by the parties, the revision report, the observation report and the testimony of the applicant. [ 4 ] The Court considers that there is a preponderance of evidence that: − The youth remained placed in a reception center for nine months and she reintegrated the foster home of her aunt, Mrs.

C, from Town A; − The youth skipped classes regularly, did not respect the authority of her teacher; − She did not respect the authority of her aunt; − During a short stay in Town B with her aunt, the police had to look for the youth who had not came back to her aunt’s care; − She was involve in aggressive altercations with peers and was charged of assault on two occasions; − On August 15, 2017 she attacked a peer who had to be hospitalised in Town C. [ 5 ] From June 29 to July 27, 2017 the youth stayed at the Center A in Town D to address various issues, such as substance use and personal issues. [ 6 ] The youth collaborated well in the Center A, but was inconsistent, [ 7 ] The youth admits to consume marijuana regularly. [ 8 ] The aunt is unable to control the youth’s behaviour.

[ 9 ] Since August 18, 2017 protective measures are applied and the youth is placed in the reception centre. [ 10 ] Even placed there, the youth misbehaves. She sniffed shoe protection spray on September 1, she hit a worker on September 2 and she hit another worker twice on September 12. The youth defies authority and does not respect it. [ 11 ] Considering the youth’s problems, we have to ensure first the protection of her physical integrity and after to develop her maturity.

She must become accountable for her actions. [ 12 ] The youth has significant relationship with her aunt C and she wants to return with her. The aunt is ready to assume her niece when X will have change her way to behave. [ 13 ] The parents did not seek for services over the last year and have the same problems. They consume alcohol and drugs abusively. The father is presently detained. They do not offer good collaboration with the social worker.

They do not have regular contacts with their daughter even knowing she misses them. [ 14 ] Given the evidence, the Court is of the opinion that the recommendations of the D.Y.P. are appropriate. The parties agree with those measures. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 15 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 16 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X, born on […], 2004 are still in danger; [ 17 ] ORDERS her placement in a reception centre for one year with reintegration in the foster home of Mrs.

C and ORDERS her placement in that foster family until her majority; [ 18 ] ORDERS the D.Y.P. to supervise the contacts between the youth and her parents; [ 19 ] ORDERS the D.Y.P. be authorized by the parents to obtain and share information with all services providers working with the family; [ 20 ] ORDERS the D.Y.P. to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the youth and her parents until the youth’s majority; [ 21 ] RECOMMENDS that the youth be evaluated by a psychologist and receives a follow-up for the time required by the professional; [ 22 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate to the execution of this order; [ 23 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth to the D.Y.P. who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Me Constantin Kiryakidis Attorney for the youth Me Adelia Ferreira Attorney for the applicant Me Michel Grenier Attorney for the parents Date of hearing: October 11, 2017