2017 QCCQ 13440, 2017 QCCQ 13440

Protection de la jeunesse — 175918 2017 QCCQ 13440 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No.: 640-41-002112-172 DATE: September 20, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on [...], 2011 MR [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in City A, Quebec, District A Applicant and MRS A, deceased Mother and MR B, residing and domiciled in City A, Quebec, District A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Sections 38 and 91 Y.P.A., R.S.Q. c.

P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 A submits to the Court a motion asking that the security and development of X be declared in danger because of the serious risk of physical abuse or unreasonable methods of upbringing (section 38 (e)

(2) Y.P.A.). [ 2 ] At the hearing, the father is absent even if duly served by the police and informed by the social worker last Tuesday of all the transportation arrangements made. As the father refuses to collaborate even if he signed voluntary measures, the Court proceeds in his absence with the consent of Me Angèle Tommasel, the child’s lawyer.

Me Aubrée Coutanson represents the applicant. [ 3 ] Evidence that the child’s situation is compromised is made with the social worker’s testimony. [ 4 ] It is proved that between March 2013 and September 2015, the child was subject of a decision of the Court of Québec. [ 5 ] The father displays alcohol and anger management related problems. [ 6 ] On April 25, 2017, the Director of Youth Protection received a report about the fact that the child was victim of physical abuse by the father.

On May 3, the child showed to his paternal grandmother and the social worker, his bite mark on his chest and stated that Mrs C, the father’s girlfriend did it. [ 7 ] On May 8, 2017, the father signed a voluntary measure and the child was entrusted to a family relative. [ 8 ] During the interview with the Sûreté of Québec on May 18, 2017, the child recognized that he was victim of physical abuse from the part of Mrs C and of his father. [ 9 ] The father would have beaten him sometimes and would have thrown rocks at him. [ 10 ] The father minimised the facts and said that he does not want to lose his son.

His girlfriend denies everything. [ 11 ] Since, the father is not collaborative and he moved in City B to his girlfriend’s place and brought his son. [ 12 ] But on August 4, the social worker learned that the child was still in City A and was not well taken care of. [ 13 ] After evaluation, the social worker learned that the child was living with his paternal grandmother and was often left alone and not fed. The child was going to his great grandmother’s house to eat and sleep when left alone or when people were drinking.

[ 14 ] Since August 15, the child is placed in foster care by the Court. [ 15 ] Considering the evidence, the Court declares the security and development of the child in danger because of the father’s neglect under

section 38 (b) (1) i. and because of the serious risk of physical abuse under

section 38 (e)

(2) Y.P.A. [ 16 ] As applicable measures, the social worker filed her social study. She recommends that the child be placed in a foster family until April 18, 2018. An uncle accepts to assume him as foster parent.

He received the child on August 23 and he and his girlfriend agree to take care of him. [ 17 ] Because of the lack of collaboration of the father, his denial of the situation, the minimisation of the fact that his spouse had her children placed by the Director of Youth Protection for physical abuse, the fact that before the mother’s death, the parents exposed the child to violence and that he was victim of neglect and the needs of X to evolve in a stable and secure family, the Court orders his placement until September 30, 2018.

THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 18 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are in danger with regard to

section 38 (b) (1) i. and (e) (2) of the Youth Protection Act; [ 19 ] ORDERS the placement of X in foster family until September 30, 2018; [ 20 ] TAKES judicial notice that the foster parent is Mr D; [ 21 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the father until September 30, 2018; [ 22 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to supervise the contacts between the child, his father and his grandmother as for the modalities, the frequency and the degree of supervision; [ 23 ] ORDERS the father to remain sober and non-violent in presence of the child; [ 24 ] RECOMMENDS the father to seek help through the social services concerning his alcohol and personal issues; [ 25 ] ORDERS the police officer to collaborate in the execution of the present order; [ 26 ] ENTRUSTS the child's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing this judgment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Me Aubrée Coutanson Attorney for the applicant Me Angèle Tommasel Attorney for the child Date of hearing: September 8, 2017