2023 QCCQ 915, 2023 QCCQ 915

Protection de la jeunesse — 23655 2023 QCCQ 915 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-51-000424-228 DATE: February 16, 2023 BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q.

X , born on [...], 2011 Child [SOCIAL WORKER 1], interim assistant Director of Youth Protection of Centre Jeunesse A Applicant -and- A Father -and- B Mother -and- C Tutor/Impleaded Party -and- LE CURATEUR PUBLIC DU QUÉBEC Impleaded Party ______________________________________________________________________ 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.). Context [ 1 ] The child resides with her maternal grandparents since February 2, 2016 in virtue of successive protection orders put in place in relation to psychological ill-treatment (exposure to domestic violence) and educational neglect in her family environment. [ 2 ] On March 18, 2019, the Court renders a permanency order entrusting the child to her maternal grandparents until her majority.

In this environment, the child continues to evolve positively and has a significant bond with her primary care givers, who are concurrently devoted to her care. [ 3 ] The child sees her mother regularly. The mother remains involved in her daughter’s life and maintains a good relationship with her parents. [ 4 ] The mother has invested herself in services and her personal situation is now more stable.

Notwithstanding, she recognizes ongoing fragilities relating more particularly to her diagnosis of borderline personality disorder, depression and anxiety. [ 5 ] The mother agrees that her child’s best interests dictate that she remains under her parent’s care. [ 6 ] As of September 2017, the father is absent from his child’s life. He fails to invest himself in the rehabilitation process ordered by the Court and communicates only sporadically with the caseworker.

His personal situation is at present unknown. [ 7 ] The Director of Youth Protection seeks that the Court defer the tutorship of the child to her maternal grandmother. [ 8 ] The father, although duly served of the proceeding, fails to appear. The Court proceeds in his absence. At the hearing, the

mother consigns her agreement to the conclusions sought. [ 9 ] The Court grants the application. Herein follow the elements justifying this decision. Analysis and decision [ 10 ] The Court cites the legislative foundation of the Director's request as provided by the Youth Protection Act : 70.1 Application. If a child is in one of the situations described in

section 207 of the Civil Code and the director has taken charge of the child's situation, the director may apply to the tribunal to be appointed as tutor or to have a person he recommends appointed as tutor if he considers that tutorship is the measure most likely to protect the interest of the child and ensure the respect of his rights. Following the application, the tribunal may appoint a tutor if it considers, in the interest of the child, that such a measure is appropriate. The rules of the Civil Code apply to the tutorship, subject to the provisions of this Act. [ 11 ] As prescribed in the preceding article, the Court must conclude to existence of one of the conditions of

article 207 of the Civil Code , which stipulates as follows: The director of youth protection or the person recommended as tutor by him may also apply for the institution of tutorship to an orphan who is a minor and who has no tutor, or to a child whose father and mother both fail, in fact, to assume his care, maintenance or education, or to a child who in all likelihood would be in danger if he returned to his father and mother. [ 12 ] In applying these principles, the Court retains the following as the foundation for the application of tutorship: • The father, by his disinterest and abandonment, has failed to assume his parental responsibilities; • As for the mother, although she remains involved in her daughter’s life, she is unable to ensure her care, maintenance or education on a full-time basis; • The maternal grandparents have demonstrated their capacity to ensure the child’s needs, education and well-being on a permanent basis; • They are able to assume a protective role without the accompaniment of the Director; [ 13 ] In view of the evidence, the Court determines that tutorship protects the interest of the child and respects her rights.

FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 14 ] GRANTS the present application; [ 15 ] DEFERS the tutorship of the child X to Mrs. C; [ 16 ] ENTRUSTS the child to her tutor; [ 17 ] THE WHOLE without costs. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Marc Castonguay Attorney for the Applicant Date of hearing: February 16, 2023