2012 QCCQ 9768, 2012 QCCQ 9768

Protection de la jeunesse — 12857 2012 QCCQ 9768 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth chamber No: 635-41-000443-116, 635-741-000444-114 635-41-000445-111 DATE: February 1, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DANIEL BÉDARD, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 1994 Y, born on […], 1999 Z, born on […], 2001 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A., working in City A Applicant -and- A , residing and domiciled in City A, Quebec, district B Mother -and- B , residing and domiciled in City A, Quebec, district B Father of Z and Y ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (

Section 38 and 91 , Youth Protection Act, R.S.Q. c. P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ I - INTRODUCTION [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection demands to the Court, to declare the security and development of X, born on […], 1994, her sister Y, born on […], 1999 and her brother Z, born on […], 2001, in danger. [ 2 ] The mother is present and represented. The father is absent, presently serving a detention term. As for the children, they are present and represented.

II - ISSUE TO RESOLVE [ 3 ] The present file does not raise any litigious issue related to the security and development of the children. Indeed, the dangerous state is recognised by the mother following her admissions of the main allegations of the petition. As for the father, the application was served to him in detention and afterwards the social worker communicated with him.

He also recognised the dangerous state and furthermore agreed with the measures recommended. [ 4 ] The children do not agree with measures even if they made sufficient allegations relative to the factual information outlined in the application. The mother is in principle, in agreement with the measures recommended but considering the position of her children, she sides with their position.

III - ANALYSIS OF THE FACTS AND DECISION [ 5 ] The evidence tendered consists of the admissions made by the parties and the documents filed in Court, namely the agreement on voluntary measures and the occurrence reports from the police. [ 6 ] The parents have a way of life that endangers the security and development of the children. Alcohol and drug abuse combined with domestic violence. Consequently, the children lack supervision, guidance and appropriate structure. Often their basic needs are not

fulfilled. [ 7 ] This situation led to the signature of an agreement on voluntary measures in March 2011, with measures applicable until December 17, of the same year. [ 8 ] At the time the father was absent, serving a 16 months sentence in detention, following a plea of guilt to an accusation of assault on the mother. The children were also displaying behavioural problems. [ 9 ] More specifically, the child Y who has a medical condition and an intellectual deficiency lacked proper supervision and needed specialized attendance.

Consequently, she was entrusted to a foster family outside Area A, in City B. [ 10 ] The child X was to remain with the mother but considering the context, she decided to stay with her cousin, a teacher, where she still resides. As for the child Z, he was also maintained with he mother, but on October 21, 2011, the mother left the community. The child was in the care of a babysitter, but the mother did not return.

The babysitter, on November 1, 2011 could not continue to assume responsibility for the child and he was thus entrusted to the care of the paternal grandparents. [ 11 ] Indeed the mother did not return in her community until recently. She was residing in City C and was involved in alcohol abuse incidents according to the occurrence reports from the police, filed in the Court file by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 12 ] The security and development of the children are in danger in regards to paragraphs

b) and

c) of

section 38 of the Law. IV - MEASURES APPLICABLE [ 13 ] The evidence tendered consists of the testimony of the social worker and the social study. [ 14 ] The social worker affirms that the children cannot be reintegrated in their family environment until the parents modify their way of life and increase their parental skills. [ 15 ] The mother has personal issues to address and must also follow or enter into a therapeutic process to solve her alcohol and drug abuse.

Furthermore, the father will be arriving before the end of January 2011, following his release from detention. [ 16 ] Consequently, as a couple, as parents and as individuals the parents must address specific issues in order to modify their way of life, together or separately. [ 17 ] Until significant changes take place, the reintegration of the children is not possible.

The way of life of the parents and its consequences on the security and development of the children is a situation that has been in place for many years and prior to the signature of the agreement on voluntary measures, the Director of Youth Protection had brought the situation in front of the Court. [ 18 ] The testimony of the social worker convinces the Court that the measures proposed are in he best interest of the children.

The parents are of the same opinion, notwithstanding the hesitation of the mother at the last minute, given the presence of the children. [ 19 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the demands; [ 21 ] DECLARES the security and development of the children in danger; [ 22 ] ORDERS following measures in accordance with

section 91 of the Law:

a) entrusts the child Z to the paternal grandparents for a period of 6 (six) months, starting on January 10, 2012;

b) the foster care of the child Y to a foster family for a period of 12 (twelve) months starting on January 10, 2012;

c) entrusts the child X to her cousin, C, for a period of 6 (six) months, starting on January 10, 2012;

d) that a person working for an establishment or organism, provide aid counsel and assistance to the children and the parents, for a period of 12 (twelve) months, starting on January 10,2012;

e) that the parents participate and collaborate in the measures proposed to correct the situation; [ 23 ] AUTHORIZES and MAINTAINS personal relations between the parents and the children; [ 24 ] ORDERS that access and visitation rights between the parents and the children, be exercised under the supervision of the Director of Youth Protection, as for the frequency and modalities; [ 25 ] ORDERS any police officer to collaborate in the execution of the foster care measures, if requested to do so, by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 26 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing the measures ordered by the Court.

__________________________________ DANIEL BÉDARD, J.C.Q. Me Mathieu Brassard Lawyer for the children Me Alexandre Cimon Lawyer for the D.Y.P. Me Jacques Stuart Lawyer for the mother Date of hearing: January 10, 2012