2016 QCCQ 10887, 2016 QCCQ 10887

Protection de la jeunesse — 164446 2016 QCCQ 10887 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No. 614-41-000122-152 DATE: August 17, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DENISE DESCÔTEAUX J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X (2012-[…]) [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A Social Services, working in Town A, Quebec, district A Applicant And A, residing and domiciled in Town A, Quebec, district A Mother And B, residing and domiciled in Town A, Quebec, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ( sections 38 and 91 , Youth Protection Act , CQLR c.

P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 YPA). [ 1 ] [Social Worker 1], delegate of the Director of Youth Protection of the A Social Services, is submitting a motion to declare that the security and development of X, 3 years old, is in danger with regard to

section 38 (b)(iii), 38 (b)(2) and 38 (

c) of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] At the hearing, the parents were present, assisted by Mtre. Constantin Kiryakidis for the mother and Mtre. Myriam Gaudreault for the father. The child was represented by Mtre. Michel Grenier and the applicant by Mtre. Camille Champeval. [ 3 ] The draft agreement states that the consent of the parties was given in a free and enlightened manner. The parties acknowledge the following facts which endanger the security and the development of the child; 3.1. This family is known from the Director of Youth Protection for a few years now; 3.2.

Y, X and Z were the subject of Court orders until January 2015, has it appears from their Court files numbered 640-41-001729- 141001726-147, 640-41-001729-141001728-143 and 640-41-001729-141001729-141; 3.3. On July 14 th , 2014, the Honourable Denyse Leduc rendered a decision in the situation of Y, C, X and Z, declaring that their security and development were endangered because of neglect by the parents, psychological ill treatment and unreasonable methods of upbringing under

section 38 (b)(i)(iii), 38(

c) and 38 (e)(1), has it appears from a copy of the judgment filed as exhibit D-2; 3.4. On October 15, 2014, the Honourable Josée Bélanger rendered a decision in revision, implementing a draft agreement, as it appears from a copy of the judgment filed as exhibit D-3; 3.5. On November 25, 2014. the Honourable Jean Gravel rendered a decision in revision the file of C, as it appears from a copy of the judgment files as exhibit D-4; 3.6. The situation of C is still under Court order and the measures were finishing on November 25, 2015; 3.7.

Since a few months, all the children were back with the father and the situation was better; 3.8. Unfortunately, on June 30, 2015, the Director of Youth Protection received a report concerning drinking at the father’s place;

3.9. When the Youth Protection went to the father’s house, the mother was intoxicated, sitting at the table with other people drinking; 3.10. After being woken up by the worker, the child X was sitting on someone’s lap and this person was intoxicated; 3.11. The father was passed out on the couch; 3.12. The kitchen and the living room were littered with empty beer cans and a 36 pack of beer was on the floor; 3.13. The mother was highly intoxicated and explained to Youth Protection that she had a babysitter but she left; 3.14.

The Youth Protection checked the rest of the house and the youth C was passed out in another room; 3.15. C denied drinking in the house that night but explained that she was drinking somewhere else the night before; 3.16. Y admitted to the Youth Protection that her parents were drinking since the night before; 3.17. She also admitted that both parents never had a babysitter at home; 3.18. Y admitted drinking too at home; 3.19. The Youth Protection managed to wake up the father and the father got mad against the Youth Protection; 3.20.

The father started to blame his daughters about what was happening, but more specifically about the consequences of not respecting the rules (ex.: curfews, house rules, etc.); 3.21. The children were placed in foster care under immediate protective measures; 3.22. Then, a provisional agreement entrusting the children in foster care was signed; 3.23.

Both parents display the same alcohol related problems and the impacts on the children are continuing. [ 4 ] The also agree on several measures in order to put an end to the situation which endangers the child’s security and development; ORDER that X be placed in a Foster home for a maximum period of 3 months with integration to the care of his mother as soon as the situation allows and on the strict condition that she remain at [center A], taking note that the current plan is to integrate the child by the beginning of September 2016; ORDER that following his integration with his mother at [center A], X. be entrusted to the care of his mother; ORDER that the mother continues treatment at [center A] and completes the program including after care services; ORDER that the father takes steps to undergo a substance abuse assessment to be done by an independent expert within the next 15 days; ORDER that the father undergoes and completes a substance abuse assessment, to be done by an independent expert, to be agreed upon with the DYP; AUTHORIZE the DYP to have access to the father’s substance abuse assessment, once it is completed; ORDER that the frequency and modality of contacts between the father and the child be determined by DYP, and to include supervision if necessary; ORDER that the parents ensure that X is not exposed to any individuals under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol during visits; ORDER that X and his parents fully collaborate with the Director, meet with the worker upon request and inform the worker of any significant changes; TAKE NOTE that DYP will be in charge of driving/transporting the child to the mother at [center A] when he will be integrated to her care; ORDER that the Director be authorized to obtain and share information with all service providers working with the family concerning attendance, progress and collaboration; ORDER aid, counsel and assistance be provided to X and his family for a period of one year; [ 5 ] Accordingly, the Court is of the opinion that the measures are likely to put an end to the situation and respect the rights and the interest of the child; FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 6 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 7 ] DECLARES the security and development of X in danger accordingly to

section 38 (b)(iii), 38 (b)(2) and 38 (

c) of the Youth Protection Act .;

[ 8 ] ENDORSES the draft agreement; [ 9 ] ORDERS the implementation of the measures mentioned in the draft agreement signed by the parties on August 3, 2016; [ 10 ] ORDERS the parties to respect the measures proposed; [ 11 ] ORDERS the clerk of the Court of Quebec, Youth Division, to annex to this judgment copy of the draft agreement to form an integral part hereof, and to annex such copy to any copy of the judgment to be subsequently delivered; __________________________________ DENISE DESCÔTEAUX J.C.Q. Mtre. Camille Champeval DYP for the A Health and Social Services Attorney for the applicant Mtre.

Michel Grenier, avocat Attorney for the child Mtre. Constantin Kiryakidis Community legal center A Attorney for the mother Mtre. Myriam Gaudreault, avocate Attorney for the father Date of hearing: August 4, 2016