2017 QCCQ 5812, 2017 QCCQ 5812

Protection de la jeunesse — 172535 2017 QCCQ 5812 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 525-41-032095-176 DATE: March 27, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE LINE BACHAND, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF THE YOUTH PROTECTION A X Born on [...] 2008 child and A B parents JUDGMENT

Section 38 L.P.J. ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] This judgment is the written version of a decision rendered verbally on March 27, 2017. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection (Director) is requesting the Court to declare that the security or development of X (8 years old) and his sibling are in danger. [ 3 ] The Director submits that the child and his sibling are exposed to the serious conflicts of separation of their parents which could cause harm to them (section 38 paragraph c) of the Youth Protection Act). [ 4 ] To correct the situation, the Director recommends the following measures: • To entrust the children to their parents as for the Superior Court Order; • To order that both parents ensure that the children partake in assessments recommended by treating professionals and to follow the recommendations; • To order that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the family for a period of 9 months; • To recommend that both parents take steps to learn co-parenting strategies (i.e. separate co-parenting classes).

[ 5 ] The Court decides to proceed by a joint hearing because the reasons invoked to get involved in the family and the measures recommended are the same for the child and her sibling. [ 6 ] The parents are present at the hearing and are represented by attorneys. The children are also represented by attorney. During the hearing the parents didn’t testify. [ 7 ] Both parents admit the following subparagraphs: “

a) the parents have had conjugal violence incidents in the past;

b) the father is not comfortable communicating with the mother and usually asks one of their mutual friends or social worker to relay messages to her;

c) the parents engage in parental alienation-type behaviour;

d) on several occasions X and Y have stated that their father speaks negatively about the mother;

e) although X and Y deny the mother speaking negatively about the father, on one occasion, X reported that his mother stated that the father doesn’t listen to rules or the judge and also told him that she would go to jail if they called the father;

f) on July 8 th 2016, the mother filmed the father picking up their son from daycare to get proof that he still owns his car, as he alleged in Superior Court that he sold it and wanted the mother to share her mini van with him; […]

h) the parents are in constant disagreement about the children’s basic needs;

i) the children are noticeably affected by the parent’s behaviour;” [ 8 ] The admissions of the parties, the testimony of the caseworker and the documentary evidence filed by the Director convince the Court that the child and his sibling are in a situation described at

section 38

c) of the Youth Protection Act because they are seriously or repeatedly subjected to behaviour on the part of their parents that could cause them harm, namely as a result of their exposure to their parent’s ongoing conflict. [ 9 ] The parents need to learn how to co-parent in the context of their separation. The measures suggested by the Director are well founded and meet the best interest of the child and his sibling. [ 10 ] THE COURT: [ 11 ] DECLARES that the security or development of X is in danger because of the ground 38

c) of the Youth Protection Act; [ 12 ] AS FOR THE MEASURES : [ 13 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted to his parents considering that the parents will follow the Superior Court judgment actually in force or any other upcoming Superior Court judgment; [ 14 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that there is a process at the Superior Court actually; [ 15 ] ORDERS that neither parent discuss DYP, divorce issues or speak negatively about the other parent in the presence of the child; [ 16 ] ORDERS that both parents ensure that the child partake in assessments recommended by treating Professionals and FOLLOWS the recommendations; [ 17 ] RECOMMENDS that both parents take steps to learn co-parenting strategies (i.

e) separate co-parenting classes); [ 18 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the child and the family for a period of nine (9) months;

[ 19 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 20 ] ORDERS the execution of this judgement by any peace officer, if necessary; __________________________________ Line BACHAND, J.C.Q. Me Nadia SABIK Director’s attorney Me Berna TABET Child’s attorney Me Debra SHAPIRO Mother’s attorney Me Andreas STEGMANN Father’s attorney Date of hearing: March 27 2017