2011 QCCQ 5313, 2011 QCCQ 5313

Protection de la jeunesse — 111269 2011 QCCQ 5313 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] “Youth Division” DATE: February 9, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF : 640-41-001341-103 X 1997 […] 640-41-001342-101 Y 2004 […] ___________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1 ], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., Town A, district A Applicant -and- A, domiciled and residing in Town B, province of Quebec, district A Mother -and- B , domiciled and residing in Town B , province of Quebec, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT Sections 38 and 75 of the Youth Protection Act ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] [Social Worker 1 ], delegate of the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., asks the Court to declare the security and development of X, 13 years old, and Y (called “Y ” in this hearing) A, 6 years old, in danger, in regard to

section 38

b) and

c) of the Youth Protection Act. [ 2 ] At the hearing the children are represented by Me Jean-Claude Latraverse, and the mother, by Me Sarah Plamondon. [ 3 ] The father is absent and was duly served. He wrote a letter in which he states that he doesn’t want to attend Court, and that he is aware of the conclusions of the motion. [ 4 ] Me Sarah Plamondon, for the mother, admits several allegations and agrees with the placement of the children, in foster care for a period of six months. [ 5 ] She states that the children are living with their paternal grandparents in B, and that they like it.

She agrees with a placement of six months at their grand-parents place. The mother wants visits rights during holidays because she stays in C . [ 6 ] Me Jean-Claude Latraverse, for both children, ignores all the paragraphs of the motion.

[ 7 ] Concerning X, he agrees to stay at the foster home where he is living now. [ 8 ] The evidence reveals that since September 2009, the father improved a lot. He has not been drinking for long periods of time and he says openly that he’s very interested to have his children with him. According to the evidence the father changed a lot. [ 9 ] In November 2010, an incident occurred between X and his father. He spent a week at his father’s home. When he came back to his grand mother’s, she noticed that X was reacting differently.

She learned that the father was drinking in X’s presence which made X very upset. [ 10 ] The parties admit that the security and development of the children, X (1997 […]) and Y “Y ” (2004 […]) are in danger. [ 11 ] The Court proceeds to the applicable measures inquiry. [ 12 ] The DYP requests a progressive reintegration of the children with the father. The father is interested to have his children back even if he wrote a letter saying that he doesn’t want to show up in Court. [ 13 ] Me Latraverse questions the father’s motivations.

He asks to continue the hearing on an other date, in order to hear the father in Court. The Court rejects Me Latraverse motion. The motion is late, the father has been served and has chosen not to come in Court.

The Court is of the opinion that to delay the hearing would not be in the children’s best interest. [ 14 ] After hearing the evidence on the applicable measures, the Court believes that the father is very ambivalent and not ready for his children’s reintegration in a near future. [ 15 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT : [ 16 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X (1997 […]) and Y “ Y ” (2004 […]) are in danger; [ 17 ] ORDERS the foster care of both children in a foster family for a period of six months; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the parents and the children be favoured and supervised by the DYP as for the modalities and frequency; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the father seeks help trough social services for his alcohol problem; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the mother meet with social services on a regular basis in order to work on her personal issues and that she follows social service recommendations; [ 21 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the children and their family for a period of one year; [ 22 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate to the execution of this enactment; [ 23 ] ENTRUSTS the children’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., for the purpose of executing this enactment. __________________________________ JOSÉE BÉLANGER, J.C.Q.

M e Robert-André Adam, attorney for the D.Y.P. M e Jean-Claude Latraverse, attorney for the children M e Sarah Plamondon, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: January 11, 2011