2019 QCCQ 15731, 2019 QCCQ 15731

Protection de la jeunesse — 194991 2019 QCCQ 15731 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [ … ] TOWN OF [ … ] Youth Division No: 635-41-000831-179 DATE: January 14, 2019 (written judgment rendered on May 3, 2019) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [ … ] , 2004 [ social worker 1 ] & [ social worker 2 ] , Youth Protection workers, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in Town A, district A Applicants and A, residing and domiciled at [ … ] , district A Mother and B, residing and domiciled at [ … ] , district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 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 revise a decision rendered on October 4, 2018, regarding the adolescent X, born on [ … ] , 2004. At that date the Court declared the security and development still in danger and ordered that the adolescent remains with the parents until April 17, 2019. [ 2 ] The DYP submits that the situation does not allow to return the youth to her parents and that the placement has to be prolonged.

Position of the parties [ 3 ] The mother is absent and not represented. Me Apollon informs the Court that the mother went to [province A] a couple of days before Christmas, but she didn’t come back and didn’t inform of her whereabouts. She was dully served with the application. Me Apollon asks to proceed in her absence. Considering the consent of the parties and the interest of the adolescent, the Court authorizes to proceed in the absence of the mother. [ 4 ] The father is present and represented by Me Lazarov.

He ignores most of the allegations, but he agrees with the measures. [ 5 ] X who is 14 years old is present and represented Me Martineau. She admits most of the allegations, but she contests the measures. She would like to live in [province A] with her sister. If not possible, she wants to be entrusted in a foster home. Historical situation [ 6 ] On December 18, 2017 , the situation of X was submitted to the Court. The DYP was already involved in her situation for few years. X had few mental health diagnosis and took medication since a long time ago.

The Court [1] summarized as follows the historical situation: [6] On April 11, 2011, the Court endorsed a draft agreement on the measures aimed at putting an end to the child’s endangerment. She was maintained with her parents and everyone agreed that the child should receive medical attention. The file was closed at the end of the measures. [7] In December 2012, the Court declared her security and development in danger because the child witnessed a lot of domestic violence between her parents. The child was afraid of her father.

The child was entrusted to a foster family for a period of eight months. [8] On August 28, 2013, the Court ordered that the child be entrusted to a rehabilitation centre for one year and ordered that the child receive many health services: assessment for ADHD, counselling regarding past sexual abuse and care by specialist for her hearing difficulties.

[9] On May 24, 2014, the Court maintained the child in a Group Home for three months with a possible return to her parents’ care at the end of the school year, and ordered a follow-up by Social Services for six months. [10] On December 23, 2015, voluntary measures were signed by the parties by which the child was entrusted to a rehabilitation centre until the end of the current school year, with gradual reintegration with the parents if the situation allowed it. [11] On March 1, 2016, voluntary measures were signed by the parties which renewed the previous measures until June 30, 2017.

She used to receive a follow-up from the child psychiatrist, but recently the mother did not bring her to her appointment, considering her daughter does not need it anymore. In June 2017, she came back at her parent’s place, but she missed a lot of school and displayed outbursts. The school offered her services and strategies adapted to her developmental delays to ensure she could succeed academically.

The Court declared that the security and development of X were in danger, entrusted her to her parents, ordered the medical follow-up, the services of an external educator and recommended a psychological follow-up for the mother. [ 7 ] On August 17, 2018 , on provisional applications, the measures were prolonged. [ 8 ] On October 4, 2018 , the Court noted that since the previous order, the outbursts became more frequent and more violent to the point that the police intervention was needed and she had been handcuffed. Her medication has been reduced as she suffered from hallucinations.

The family received the services from a nurse who go home every morning to help X taking her medication. The school was still offering very adapted services. The child psychiatrist noted [2] that X needs, “a highly structured environment which would serve the purpose of making X feel safe and reassured, allowing her to behave normally.” She also recommended “that Ms. A gets a regular follow-up with a psychiatrist in order to help her work on her own anxiety so that she will be capable of handling her daughter’s anxiety. Ms.

A refusal to meet with a psychiatrist is considered as the highest risk factor in the present situation.” Despite the facts that the mother met twice with her psychiatrist, the parents denied having any difficulty. The father displayed anger management issues. He threatened X, and she was scared of him. The family received the services of the external educator once every two weeks at the beginning, but the meeting became less frequent.

The Court maintained the adolescent at her parent’s place with the following conditions: - That the adolescent receive the required medical care and the child psychiatric follow-up; - That an external educator meet with the family on a regular basis; - That the parents cooperate with transparency with the educator; - That the father seek help for his anger management problem; - That the mother continues her psychiatric follow-up. [ 9 ] On November 14, 2018 , on provisional measures, the adolescent was entrusted to a foster family. [ 10 ] On December 13, 2018 , the provisional measures were reviewed.

As she was not doing well in her foster family, she was entrusted to the Group Home in Town B, but this unit did not respond to her needs. The Court entrusted her to a rehabilitation centre and recommend a specialized one for mental health issues. Facts [ 11 ] Since the last order, the situation at home was getting worse. The parents displayed very violent relationship, and get separated a few times during the year. They do not seem to have the same perception of the situation.

The father also has a very bad influence and was contributing to the parental alienation in the household. [ 12 ] On November 3, 2018, X was arrested after having threatened her mother and her sibling with a knife. She says hearing voices which tell her to kill her family members. Following this event, she was hospitalized in Town B, and met with the child psychiatrist who concluded that she has an invasive mental state secondary to a maternal projection.

The specialist concluded that she can’t come back under her mother's care, considering that she has a negative influence on her and that she greatly influences her behaviours. The psychiatrist confirms that X suffers from anxiety, she is cognitively rigid and has hearing difficulties. [ 13 ] Few days after her arrival in the foster family, she assaulted the foster mother and was entrusted to the Group Home in Town B. [ 14 ] At school, thanks to the services offered, she is doing well.

She still has her learning difficulties, but she does not display behavioural issues. [ 15 ] The DYP noted that X’s most important issues are regarding her social skills. She had difficulties to understand social cues, and she is in her own world.

She also has difficulty to make difference between what is real and what is not, and also when a question is asked to her, she could answer something totally unrelated. [ 16 ] The external educator also worked with the parents, but they do not seem to apply the strategies as the pictograms recommended are never exposed in the house. [ 17 ] The DYP still suspects that the mother displays mental health issues. On his side, the father has a cancer and started to have medical appointments.

The parents do not recognize their responsibilities in their daughter’s situation, and they do not admit that their daughter has a mental capacity of a height-year-old child. The father is convinced that X was mistreated when she was entrusted to a foster family, and according to him, this explains her current difficulties. [ 18 ] The father explains that he completed [ … ] six-week-treatment for his alcohol addiction issues. He wants to transmit to his daughter the tools he learned there. He wants to help her and to provide for her.

[ 19 ] According to the father, X is frequently mad after her mother. He tells his daughter to be patient. He knows his daughter was mistreated and she currently lives with the consequence. While at [the six-week-treatment], he realized that he was also mistreated when he was younger. [ 20 ] The father wants her daughter to receive help for her anger management issues, and for this reason, he does not want that X go to [province A] because she won’t receive help there.

He wants to be able to visit her and hopes that his spouse will collaborate with the services. [ 21 ] The father wants to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection, but express having difficulty to meet with someone when he goes to the DYP's office. [ 22 ] X is currently at the Group Home, but the DYP worker is currently looking for a more adapted resource for mental health issues.

He agrees with the father when he says that the main issue is the anger management, but it’s difficult to resolve as she is doing well in a structured environment. [ 23 ] To find the most adapted resources, the DYP worker met with the psychologist, the doctor and the external educators. The child psychiatrist will re-assess shortly to know the exact need, but for sure no resources exist in the [region A]. [ 24 ] X is still taking three different medications.

The father considered that this medication is not well adapted, but since she is at the Group Home, nothing wrong was noted regarding any side effects. [ 25 ] The DYP plans to request an evaluation regarding her intellectual deficiency. The DYP worker does not know which specialist could perform this assessment, but intends to make some verification. A speech disability is also suspected. [ 26 ] X expresses not feeling well at the Group Home because the other youths are not nice with her. She can also be mad after them.

She wants to have more contact with her father, and would like to live with her sister Y, even if she did not see her for many years. Analysis [ 27 ] The evidence shows that X need a structured environment to evolve positively. The Group Home in Town A offers the structure, but does not have all the resources to answer all the special needs of the adolescent. [ 28 ] Even if her situation is known since 2011, her specific needs remains still unknown.

During that time, she did not receive all the appropriate and the required services. [ 29 ] Fortunately, the child psychiatrist will assess shortly to give more precision about the most adapted resources X needs.

Considering many resources were tried since the beginning of the follow-up, the Court insists on the importance to apply the recommendations of the child psychiatrist, to make the necessary steps and the necessary pressure to find the resources and to entrust her there as soon as possible. [ 30 ] The father, for sure has a responsibility in this situation, but as he seems to be more open to work and to collaborate with the DYP, he Court encourages him to maintain this openness, to accept and apply the recommendations set out by the child psychiatrist. [ 31 ] Regarding his personal situation, as he consents to undergo to a psychiatric assessment, the Court will order that this evaluation be made shortly. [ 32 ] Unfortunately, the mother is absent and her position is not known.

It would have been in the best interest of her daughter that she participates to the debate.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 33 ] GRANTS the application; [ 34 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the youth X, born on […], 2004, are still in danger; [ 35 ] ORDERS that the youth be entrusted to an institution operating a rehabilitation centre, chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre, followed by a reintegration in a foster family if the situation allows it; [ 36 ] ORDERS that those two resources be chosen according to her special needs; [ 37 ] TAKES ACKNOWLEDGE that the Director of Youth Protection is looking for these adapted resources; [ 38 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the youth and the parents be determined by the Director of Youth Protection as for the modalities, frequency and degree of supervision and that those contacts take place as frequently as possible; [ 39 ] ENCOURAGES home visits with the father according to the criminal conditions he has to respect, knowing that those conditions could also be changed; [ 40 ] ORDERS that the parents periodically report to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in their youth’s regard to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the youth are in danger; [ 41 ] ORDERS that the youth and the parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures; [ 42 ] ORDERS that the youth receive specific health care and health services such as an evaluation and a follow-up with a child psychiatrist;

[ 43 ] ORDERS that a psychological evaluation be performed; [ 44 ] ORDERS that the recommendations set out by the health professionals be followed including any other evaluation they could recommend, and also regarding a suitable place where X could be entrusted; [ 45 ] ORDERS that a potential intellectual deficiency be evaluated and the recommendations be followed; [ 46 ] ORDERS that any language disabilities be evaluated and the recommendations be followed; [ 47 ] ORDERS that the school and the rehabilitation centre receive a copy of the recommendations set out by the professionals to be able to apply recommendations; [ 48 ] ORDERS that the health professionals receive a complete copy of the medical and schooling file, and a copy of the judgment to be issued; [ 49 ] AUTHORIZES the medical professionals involved in the parents and X’s situation to communicate between them; [ 50 ] AUTHORIZES the exchange of information between the Director of Youth Protection and all the health professionals; [ 51 ] ORDERS that a psychiatric evaluation of the father be performed and the recommendations be followed; [ 52 ] ORDERS that the parents follow the professional recommendations; [ 53 ] ORDERS that the youth and the family receive the services of an external educator; [ 54 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling or assistance to the youth and the family; [ 55 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth X , to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 56 ] ORDERS the execution of the present judgment by any peace officer; [ 57 ] THE WHOLE until January 31, 2020. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Geneviève Apollon, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Isabelle Martineau, attorney for the child Me Ivan Lazarov, attorney for the father Date of hearing: January 14, 2019