2016 QCCQ 18118, 2016 QCCQ 18118

Protection de la jeunesse — 169047 2016 QCCQ 18118 JL4031 COURT OF QUÉBEC Youth Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] N° : 525-41-030796-163 DATE: May 18, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDED BY : Mr.

JUSTICE CLAUDE LAMOUREUX, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ In the matter of : X Born on: [...], 2002 The Director of Youth Protection A applicant - and - A, the mother - and - B, the father respondents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (section 38 of the Youth Protection Act) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcasting of any information that may lead to the identification of a child or his parents.

Any person who contravenes this provision commits an offence and is liable to fine. [ Y.P.A. sections 11.2.1 and 135 ] [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection ( the Director) seized the Court with a motion under

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act requesting that the security or development of the adolescent be declared to be in danger for serious behavioural disturbances. [ 2 ] The Director alleges the following: 3.1. as background information, Youth Protection has been involved with the adolescent’s older sister since 2014; 3.2. the adolescent has serious behavioural disturbances and objects to steps taken by the parents to put an end to the situation, more particularly but not restrictively, in that:

a) the adolescent does not respect the house rules;

b) the adolescent is unaccountable during evenings and weekends, does not respect her curfew nor informs parents of her whereabouts;

c) the adolescent associates with negative peers, including a girl who is known to recruit girls for prostitution;

d) the adolescent is verbally abusive towards her parents and does not respect their authority;

e) the adolescent does not respect school authorities and is failing her school year; 3.3. on Friday, February 19 th , 2016, the adolescent was expelled from [School A] because of her problematic behaviour; 3.4. the parents are unable to control the adolescent’s behaviour and on Friday, February 19 th , 2015, the adolescent was placed in a rehabilitation centre under immediate protective measures; [ 3 ] As explained later, X is entrusted to a rehabilitation centre under a provisional order rendered on February 23, 2016.

This placement was extended by the undersigned on March 18, 2016 until today. [ 4 ] Today, the Director is recommending that X be reintegrated home over the next month with aid, counsel and assistance for the next year. [ 5 ] X, her lawyer, and her parents are present. The parties agree with the measures proposed by the Director. [ 6 ] Thus, the role of the Court is to determine if indeed, X’s security and development is compromised and if so, if the measures proposed are in her best interest.

Hearing of March 18, 2016 [ 7 ] Last March 18, X and her parents essentially admitted the allegations of the motion. [ 8 ] The facts established at that time were that X has been presenting serious behaviour problems, particularly since the beginning of this school year. She displays difficult behaviour at school and is failing all of her subjects. She does not respect her curfew and sometimes stays out very late. She does not inform her parents of her whereabouts and there are concerns that she has been associating with negative peers, including one who recruits girls for the purposes of prostitution.

She is also openly disrespectful towards her parents. [ 9 ] X’s parents have strong personal and family values and want her to respect basic rules, participate in family life and do well in school. They are open to suggestions and the Director’s intervention. [ 10 ] The family is known to the Director since 2014 due to interventions with X’s 15 year old sister, Y. Y’s worker has warned X that her behaviour would get her in trouble and she must change her ways, to no avail. As well, since X’s situation was signalled in November 2015, attempts by the Director to mediate and find common ground have not succeeded.

X does not accept some rules and disrespects others. [ 11 ] The situation came to a head in mid-February when X’s behaviour became increasingly problematic and when she was expelled from school. Her parents could no longer cope with the situation and requested that she be placed.

This led to her going into rehabilitation centre placement as of February 19, first under immediate protective measures and, since February 23, under an interim Court order. [ 12 ] Although the Director initially recommended a six month rehabilitation centre placement, the parties agreed to an interim order until today to the effect that X remain in placement with integration home if possible. Facts since March 18, 2016 [ 13 ] Over this interim period, there have been issues with X’s behaviour in the group home and outside the group home, one such incident leading to a school suspension.

However, weekend visits have gone well, except the last one where X did not respect her curfew, coming home at 1:00 am rather than 9:00 pm. It remains the plan for X to return to her parents’ care between now and the end of the school year. She has turned things around in school and will likely be passing. [ 14 ] Hopefully, with effort on X’s part and the continued collaboration of the parents, X will have a good summer and start the next school year on the right foot. She has everything needed to succeed if she puts in the effort. Time will tell if X is able to control her behaviour or not.

CONSEQUENTLY, AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 15 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 16 ] DECLARES that the security or development of X is in danger within the meaning of

Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act for serious behavioural disturbances. [ 17 ] IN VIRTUE OF THE POWERS CONFERRED UPON THE COURT BY

SECTION 91 OF THE YOUTH

PROTECTION ACT: [ 18 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted to a rehabilitation centre until June 23, 2016; [ 19 ] AUTHORIZES her integration into the parents’ care commencing today; AND FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR: [ 20 ] ORDERS that the parents continue to structure X by setting clear rules and applying consistent and appropriate consequences; [ 21 ] ORDERS that X respect her parents’ authority; [ 22 ] ORDERS that X to attend school on a daily basis and respect the school rules; [ 23 ] ORDERS a person working for [centre A] to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and the family; [ 24 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection A who shall see that these measures are carried out and these measures may be executed by any peace officer, if necessary. _________________________________ CLAUDE LAMOUREUX, J.C.Q.

M e Edith Zavodni Attorney for the applicant M e Olivia Dugré Attorney for the adolescent DATES OF HEARING: March 18 th and May 18 th , 2016 CL/nl