2016 QCCQ 11665, 2016 QCCQ 11665

Protection de la jeunesse — 165047 2016 QCCQ 11665 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001776-142 DATE: August 31, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER J.Q.C. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on […], 2010 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A of Health and Social Services A, working in Town A, A district (Quebec) […] Applicant and A , residing and domiciled in Town A, A district (Quebec) Mother ______________________________________________________________________ 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 applicant asks the Court to review a decision rendered on January 8, 2016. On that date the Court entrusted the child to the care of his maternal grandmother until he reaches the age of majority along with other measures. [ 2 ] The child is absent but represented. The mother is absent. The mother is homeless and lives somewhere in Town A. She has a transient lifestyle and has no stable address. She is not involved in the child’s life and has seen him one year ago.

She is not in touch with the Director of Youth Protection. [ 3 ] The motion is not challenged and the child’s lawyer agrees with the applicant’s recommendations for the applicable measures. The applicant seeks an order of placement in a foster home for a period of one year along with other measures. The facts [ 4 ] The Court considers the following facts as proven by preponderant evidence. [ 5 ] On January 8, 2016, the Court entrusted the child who was five years old to his maternal grandmother until he reaches the age of majority.

The grandmother was ready and committed to caring for the child on a long term basis. According to the Court it was imperative to provide the child the continuity of care, stable relationships and living conditions by the most meaningful person for him.

The Court emphasized on the absence of mobilization of the mother over time. [ 6 ] Despite being informed not to allow any contacts between the child and his maternal aunt, Mrs B, the grandmother has authorized the latter to sleep over at the home on more than one occasion. [ 7 ] Mrs B is known to have serious behavioural issues, to be physically aggressive with peers and to consume alcohol. [ 8 ] On June 19, 2016, the Youth Protection worker witnesses Mrs B getting angry and violent outside the maternal grandmother’s house.

The police was called and asked her to leave the premises. [ 9 ] On June 23, 2016, the Youth Protection worker met with the maternal grandmother regarding the child’s situation. The grandmother agreed that the child be removed from her care due to the maternal aunt behaviour in the home. The grandmother agreed that the child be in a foster home for his safety and well being. She asked for visitation nights with him. [ 10 ] The mother’s situation is still the same.

She does not seek any treatment for her alcohol abuse and does not acknowledge that her personal issues can put her child in danger. [ 11 ] The foster family knows the child. He was living in that family over a year prior to his placement with his maternal grandmother. [ 12 ] Considering the evidence as a whole the Court maintains that the security or development of the child is still in danger. The applicant’s recommendations for the measures are reasonable, appropriate and in the child’s best interest.

For these reasons the Court: [ 13 ] grants the motion; [ 14 ] maintains that the security or development of X, born on […], 2010, is still in danger; [ 15 ] revises the decision rendered on January 8, 2016; [ 16 ] orders the following measures for one year; [ 17 ] orders that the child be placed in a foster home; [ 18 ] orders that the contacts between the child and the mother be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for their length, frequency and modalities and in the presence of a third party if judged necessary; [ 19 ] orders that the contacts between the grandmother Eliza Esau and the child be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 20 ] orders that the mother remain sober in the presence of the child; [ 21 ] orders that the child attends school on a regular basis; [ 22 ] orders that the mother collaborate to the execution of this enactment; [ 23 ] withdraws certain attributes of the mother authority for X regarding medical, educational, sporting and social activities including all matter relate to passport, social insurance, medical card and driver license; [ 24 ] authorizes the Director of Youth Protection to exercise those attributes; [ 25 ] Orders that a person working for an institution or a body provides aid, counsel and assistance to the child and the family; [ 26 ] Orders the police force to collaborate to the execution of this order; [ 27 ] entrusts the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ Josée Bélanger, J.Q.C.

Me Camille Champeval, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Constantin Kiryakidis, attorney for the child Date of hearing: July 7, 2016