2021 QCCQ 10681, 2021 QCCQ 10681

Protection de la jeunesse — 214692 2021 QCCQ 10681 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-002671-219 DATE: May 27, 2021 (written judgment rendered on July 6, 2021) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2018 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...] Applicant and A, residing and domiciled at [...] Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 38 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 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) asks the Court to declare that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2018, are endangered under paragraph (e) (1) [1] of

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The DYP asks to entrust the child to a foster family with a gradual reintegration under the care of the mother if the situation allows it, until November 30, 2021. Position of the Parties [ 3 ] The mother is present and represented by Me Geneviève Lucas. She recognizes that the security and development of her child are endangered and she agrees with the measures. [ 4 ] The child is absent, but represented by Me Cassandra Neptune.

On her client’s behalf, Me Neptune submits that his situation should be declared endangered and that the recommended measures are in his best interest. Facts [ 5 ] On June 1, 2020, the mother signed a voluntary measure in which she recognized that she physically abuse the child.

By this measure, the mother agreed to entrust the child to kinship foster family, and to seek help for her personal issues. [ 6 ] The mother still recognizes that the intervention of the DYP was due to the injuries she caused to her son by slapping him strongly enough to cause bruises on his face and eye. [ 7 ] The mother has no regular follow-up with the Social Services. She only meet them for specific requests. [ 8 ] Even if the father is undeclared on the birth certificate, the biological father is known. His name is B, and he is involved in the life of the child.

He had regular contact with the child before the DYP’s involvement and when the DYP looked for a foster family, the father and his spouse, Ms. C were the one who fostered him. [ 9 ] Despite the biological father’s involvement, the child had to be moved many times during the voluntary measures. Indeed, he first went to his biological father’s place in March 2020, but in September, the family asked for a respite. The child went to one of his paternal aunt’s place, Ms. D and came back at his biological father’s place until October 13, 2020, when the father requested again that the child be moved.

He went to another paternal aunt’s place, Ms. E, but one month later, she gave up being discouraged with the oppositional and aggressive behaviours of the child. The child came back with his biological father until February 2021, and Ms. C said that he was doing better, but the couple felt tired anyway, so the child came back with Ms. E. [ 10 ] On her side, the mother showed great motivation at the beginning of the hearing. She said that she would like to change her way of life to be able to resume the care of her children. An important issue for her was the fact that she had no place to stay.

She was living at her brother’s place who sexually abused her when she was young and who force her to drink and to take drugs. She was conscious that

it was not a suitable place for her children. [ 11 ] The mother started a new relationship, and she is living at her boyfriend’s place. She is currently pregnant and the couple is waiting the new born in [...] 2021. This relation appears to be positive for the mother, but as she stopped her good collaboration, it had not been possible to assess her new living conditions. [ 12 ] Regarding the contact with her child, the mother did not show any interest to have contacts during the measures.

Despite the request she made at the beginning to have a calendar with 3 weekly visits for the duration of 3 hours each, she did not exercise any. [ 13 ] As ordered by the Court, the mother was also assessed by Dr. Beltempo, psychologist, at the beginning of the measures. As noted by the DYP worker at that moment, the mother’s motivation was well present. But the psychologist also noted that the mother is suffering from many traumas from her childhood which prevent her from being emotionally available.

He also notes that she is very young and immature in some aspects of her life and he recommended prioritizing life skills interventions. [ 14 ] The child is still with Ms. E who confirmed being ready to foster the child on a long-term basis if the mother does not mobilize herself. Ms. E is concerned by the fact that the child was moved so many times since the beginning of the DYP involvement, and she is also concerned by the fact that the mother never reach her to have news or contacts with her son.

Analysis [ 15 ] Considering the admission made by the mother, the Court has the evidence that the security and development of the child are endangered due to the physical abuses he was the victim of, by the part of the mother. [ 16 ] Now he needs to be stabilized in a safe environment to continue to develop positively. The biological father is invested in his life, but obviously unable to offer him the permanency that he need. [ 17 ] The aunt, Ms.

E is concerned by the child situation and confirmed being ready to have him on a long term basis if needed, but she will have to be supported adequately in this task as she ever gave up in the previous months. [ 18 ] It is obviously in the best interest of the child to remain in his family and to achieve this goal, the proper services should be provided to the extended family. [ 19 ] The mother seems to have stabilized her life, but with the new born coming and her lack of collaboration, it is impossible for now to have the exact portrait of her situation.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the application; [ 21 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2018, are endangered under paragraph (e) (1) of

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family, chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the child be gradually reintegrated under the care of the mother if the situation allows it; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the mother report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures she applies in her own regard or in her child’s regard to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the child are endangered; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the mother take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the mother remain sober and without any violent behaviour in the presence of the child; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the modalities, the frequency, and the degree of supervision of the contacts between the child and the mother be determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 28 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the mother; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X , to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 30 ] THE WHOLE until November 30, 2021. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Adèle Cyr, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Me Geneviève Lucas, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: May 27, 2021