2022 QCCQ 7002, 2022 QCCQ 7002

Protection de la jeunesse — 223094 2022 QCCQ 7002 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] « Youth Division »

No: 145-41-000725-223 DATE: April 21, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant and X born on […], 2017 Child and A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 declare that the security and development of the child is in danger according to sections 3 8(b)1 o i, 38(b)1 o ii, 38(b)1 o iii and 38(b)2 o of the Youth Protection Act , notably because of a situation of neglect on different aspects and a serious risk that the child is not provided with her basic needs.

Her sister is aimed by the same application, and a common evidence is presented. [ 2 ] The DYP had to intervene in this family considering certain concerns raised in this environment. On June 17, 2021, an immediate protective measure entrusts the children to a foster family and they are doing well. [ 3 ] From June 17 until June 30, 2021, the children are removed from their parental environment after a professional treating one of the children noticed bruises on her. A criminal investigation is initiated to shed light on this situation.

Upon her return into her family environment, on June 30, 2021, Y’s behaviour completely changed. [ 4 ] The child’s pediatricians suspect the presence of physical abuse considering the shape of the bruises. The parents maintain that children play outside, and these are normal injuries at that age. However, the investigation reveals nothing so the children are returned home.

Despite that, the DYP stays involved in the file, because of the family’s history, the child’s reactions and worries about neglect. [ 5 ] Surprise visits are made to the parents’ home and that of the paternal grandmother between the end of July and the end of November 2021. The observations are striking, such as the children are not scared or suspicious in the presence of the youth delegate when the parents are not there. When the parents are present, Y’s attitude changes. She does not look or talk to them.

Furthermore, the father uses an inappropriate language toward the youth delegate in the presence of the children. [ 6 ] Both children missed many medical appointments even the one concerning urinary infection symptoms. Each time they are rescheduled by the professionals but the parents cancel them or do not attend. [ 7 ] Beginning of January 2022, the mother is admitted to the hospital through the emergency room due to an overdose of her anxiety medication. She does not have any recollection of what happen exactly. The father found the mother on the kitchen floor partly unconscious.

He called 911 and went to his mother’s home (paternal grandmother), leaving the mother alone in that state. The parents’ version differs as to the course of this event. Still, the paternal grandmother is worried that her grandchildren will go back with their parents. [ 8 ] When the DYP meets the parents about what took place that night, the father demonstrates some strange behaviours during the

meeting and showed manifestations of paranoia. [ 9 ] Subsequently it appears that the couple have relationship issues and are depressed. The police officers confirm that the call received was about a suicidal attempt. A rifle and a suicide note were found on the bed explaining the reasons for their decision. A few days after the police station received disturbing calls from the father. He seems confused and refused to be brought to the hospital. [ 10 ] On January 13, 2022, a judgment on provisional measure entrusts the children to their paternal grandmother. This measure is extended until this day. [ 11 ] Afterward, the DYP has difficulty communicating with the parents to establish a

schedule to have contact with their children. They also cancel several times. Throughout the file, numerous meetings or appointments concerning the parents or the children have been cancelled by them. They always have excuses to explain their absences. [ 12 ] The supervised visits are not going as planned and there are problems. On the first visit to the parents’ house, Y refused to get out of the vehicle and had a tantrum. Her grandmother took her back home, but X stayed with her parents. All along the visit, the father acts strangely and stays in his room for half of the time.

He was not much involved for the remaining time. As for the mother, she is appropriate during the contact and her interactions with the children are good. She has a good parental sensibility. The second supervised visit is cancelled because the children refuse to go. Considering the reactions of the children, the visits are suspended. [ 13 ] The parents never attended their personal follow-up with the social worker at the CLSC. They do not collaborate with the services or with the DYP, and they are not transparent toward them.

The father, in particular, demonstrated opposition to the professionals involved with the family or avoids them. It is hard to work with him and make some changes under these circumstances. [ 14 ] Since the children are with their paternal grandmother, significant improvements are noticed compared to before. Y talks more, she plays and makes jokes. She is not reluctant with the DYP. The children do not talk about their parents, and they refuse to go see them. [ 15 ] Academically, the children no longer miss school as they did when they lived with their parents.

These absences had serious consequences for Y, who has learning difficulties. Since being entrusted to their foster family, a positive evolution of the children has been observed at school. [ 16 ] Despite their young age, the children have already experienced several traumatic episodes. As mentioned in the psychosocial report, the children have been exposed to their parents’ substance abuse, their mental health issues, domestic and family violence. Furthermore, in the past months, the parents show mental health instability.

Despite this situation, overall the mother shows significant parental skills, but she is withdrawn when the father is present. [ 17 ] The children need a stable, loving and secure environment to develop adequately. Presently, the paternal grandmother can provide such a surroundings for the children. [ 18 ] The maximal delays of placements have been reached, it means that the parents have to mobilize themselves very quickly, if they wish to change the situation or else another life project will be considered for the children.

In the past, this family received intensive services but the parents are inconsistent and do not get involved with the help offered. At the end, the children are the one affected by the events. This situation has to change. They deserve to be stable and not wait for their parents to adjust. It has gone on for too long, and we must now think exclusively about them. [ 19 ] Considering the testimonial and documentary evidence adduced, the application is well founded.

The security and development of the child are in danger according to sections 38(b)1 o i, 38(b)1 o ii, 38(b)1 o iii and 38(b)2 o of the Youth Protection Act . Further-more, the measures suggested by the DYP appear to be in the child’s best interest. FOR THESE REASONS AND THOSE EXPRESSED VERBALLY AT THE HEARING, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the application for protection; [ 21 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are considered to be in danger according to sections 38(b)1 o i, 38(b)1 o ii, 38(b)1 o iii and 38(b)2 o of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to Ms.

C until December 31, 2022; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and her parents be determined according to an agreement between the parties and AUTHORIZES the DYP to supervise them; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the parents report periodically to the DYP on the measures they apply to themselves or the child to put an end to the situation in which her security or her development is in danger; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the child receive specific health care and health services, especially a follow-up with a pediatrician; [ 26 ] RECOMMENDS the parents to involve themselves in psychological counselling in connection with their personal difficulties, including a psychological and medical follow-up as long as deemed necessary by the professionals involved; [ 27 ] RECOMMENDS the father to submit himself to a psychiatric assessment; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the child attend school regularly; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the parents actively participate in the application of the measures ordered;

[ 30 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provides, aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her family until December 31, 2022; [ 31 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the DYP of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A for the carrying out of the present judgment. __________________________________ CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. Me Louyse A. Lemieux for the applicant Me Ariane Cayer for the child Ms. A the mother (absent) Mr. B the father (absent) Written judgment filed on April 26, 2022.