2020 QCCQ 8458, 2020 QCCQ 8458

Protection de la jeunesse — 206712 2020 QCCQ 8458 JD1531 COUR DU QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] «Youth Division»

N° : 450-41-007093-199 DATE : OCTOBER 21 st , 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF : HONOURABLE MICHEL DURAND, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILD [1] : X, born on [...], 2019 and [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the CIUSSS A, working at [...], Applicant , and Undeclared father and A The mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection presents a motion for revision of the Court decision rendered by Mrs Justice Lise Gagnon on December 2 nd , 2019 on the ground of educative negligence because the mother has intellectual limitations that have an impact on her parental capacities. [ 2 ] Justice Gagnon decided to entrust X to her maternal grandfather, Mr.

B, and took judicial notice that the mother would be living with the grandfather. [ 3 ] Since this decision of December 2 nd , 2019, the mother took good care of her child and X has a general development within the normal range of her age. [ 4 ] X is going to a day care centre in City A on a full time basis and she also has a follow up with SIPPE Program once a month. [ 5 ] For her personal needs, the mother still has a monthly meeting with her psychiatrist at the CHUS and respect the

recommendations prescribed by her doctor. [ 6 ] The rest of the situation since a year is well explained in this few allegations : « 4. […]

f) on a personal level, the mother started dating again with X’s father, Mr. C, but now, the relationship seems to be over;

g) Mr. C wants to be involved in X’s life and wants to officially be declared as the father of the child on her birth certificate. He never had any contacts with X;

h) Ms A began adult educations at [School A] since January 21 st , 2020 in order to receive her high school diploma and she is motived;

i) Ms. A takes care of her daughter on a full time basis. On a few occasions, with the permission of the delegate, she took care of X alone;

j) the maternal grandfather, Mr B, is still involved in X’s life and takes gook care of his granddaughter. He has a strong bond with her;

k) Although the twelve months delay has passed, an extension of the delays is in the interest of X in order for the Youth Protection Director to clarify properly her situation whether it be with her mother, her grandfather or both of us. » [ 7 ] Considering the positive evolution of the situation and the fact that the mother is cooperating with the DYP, the Director recommends that the child be entrusted to her mother while acknowledging that she will be living at the [Centre A]. [ 8 ] The Director recommends also that the mother participate actively in the psychosocial follow up and especially in the elaboration of the intervention plan.

The mother will have to continue all her personal follow ups for the time prescribed by her professionals. [ 9 ] And finally, the Director recommends to the Court to prohibit contacts between the child and Mr. C. [ 10 ] The mother was present in court on Wednesday, October 21 st , 2020 and she agreed to all the conclusions recommended by the Director. [ 11 ] She agreed particularly with the prohibition of contacts with Mr. C. This request of prohibition of contacts was served to Mr.

C and he was present also at the Court. [ 12 ] He argued that it was a little weird for him to not be able to see X claiming that he was not a danger to her neither for the mother. [ 13 ] He acknowledged that he has not seen X since a very long time ago, so long that he can not even remember when it was. He said it was a long before Covid-19. [ 14 ] Mr C said that he went through DNA test and it came out that he was X’s father. The test was done in December 2019. [ 15 ] He wants to be declared the father of X but he has done nothing productive to have his name put on the birth certificate.

Except that he made one or maybe two phone calls to an attorney in Magog but he did not follow up. [ 16 ] He claims that he was under the impression that he would be able to have contacts after he had a positive DNA test. Somebody told him that, maybe a social worker.

But he never followed up and never tried to contact this person that he can’t identify. [ 17 ] He explained that he did not pursue his goal to have his name put on the birth certificate and he did not follow up because he had a lot of work and he was stressed. [ 18 ] The Court told him that it is very hard to believe and to understand that if X is very important for him, he did not find a day in ten months or a year or a couple of hours to get some informations on how to proceed to have his paternity established legally.

This is what the Court finds weird in the situation. [ 19 ] The Court did not find him very credible in his explanations. [ 20 ] And moreover, he was noticed that there was an orientation table regarding the future of his child and he was invited to participate. He recognizes that he received this invitation but he did not feel that he had to be there. [ 21 ] He did not asked any news to the mother regarding the medical follow up of his child for at least a month and probably more. [ 22 ] Mr.

C said that he wanted to reconnect with the mother and he would like to make things work. [ 23 ] The Court asked the mother in front of Mr. C if she had changed her mind over the prohibition of contacts requested by the DYP. She said clearly « no » and she added that she doesn’t want to have anything to do again with Mr. C and that she had told him this decision many times but he doesn’t seem to understand. [ 24 ] Considering that the child is almost one year and a half old and that she has not seen Mr. C for far more than one year, Mr. C is

clearly a perfect stranger to her and there is no bond what so ever. [ 25 ] Since Mr.

C has been absent to his child since she is born and that he had shown no real interest for X for over more than a year, the Court considers that it is not in the best interest of this child to introduce him in her life at this time. [ 26 ] Arguing that he had no time because he was busy at work or stressed, is really a poor excuse and shows that X was not is priority for more than a year. [ 27 ] It seems to the Court that he is more interested to reconnect with the mother than being interested to contribute to the child’s needs.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : GRANTS the present amended application for revision; DECLARES t hat the security and the development of the child X are in danger; REVISES the Court order rendered on December 2 th , 2019; ORDERS that the child be entrusted to her mother, while acknowledging that she will be living at the [Centre A]; PROHIBITS contacts between the child and Mr. C; ORDERS to the mother not to put the child in contact with Mr.

C; ORDERS that the mother actively participate in the psychosocial follow-up, specifically in the elaboration of the intervention plan; TAKES NOTICE of the mother’s intention of continuing her personal follow-ups (psychiatric and with the CLSC) for the time deemed necessary by the professionals; ORDERS that the mother report and change in her situation and of the means she applies to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is an danger; ORDERS that a person working for CIUSSS A or any other establishment or body, provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child X and to her mother for a period of one year ; ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth to the Director of Youth Protection of the CIUSSS A to see that the measures are carried out.

Signed on October 30 th , 2020 __________________________________ Michel Durand, J.Q.C. M e Adèle Anne Briand Malenfant for M e Idil Abdi For the Director of Youth Protection M e Geneviève Lafontaine For the child Date of hearing : October, 21 st , 2020 Last exhibit : D-6