2021 QCCQ 10565, 2021 QCCQ 10565

Protection de la jeunesse — 215929 2021 QCCQ 10565 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-41-0065218-214 DATE: June 22, 2021 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X , born on [...], 2005 Youth ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION A Applicant v.

A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ 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.). [ 1 ] Alleging that the youth presents persistent behavioural issues which affect her functioning and put her at serious risk, the Director of Youth Protection seeks a protection order providing various measures, including her placement in a rehabilitation centre for 6 months. [ 2 ] Following over one year of voluntary measures, the youth resides in a rehabilitation centre since April 2021, on a provisional basis. [ 3 ] The youth doesn’t contest the Director’s evaluation while underlining her positive progression since her placement.

While aspiring to a positive evolution, the parents recognize the difficulties in place and the need for a structured setting for their daughter. [ 4 ] After considering the evidence, the Court determines that the youth continues to require rehabilitation in a secure and neutral environment and this, for the next 6 months, while concurrently benefitting from a follow-up for one year. [ 5 ] The following elements justify this decision.

Analysis and decision [ 6 ] As of March 2020, the parties agree to voluntary measures in reason of the following: • The youth exhibits persistent and serious behavioural disturbance; • She has important suicidal ideations that have led to repeated hospitalizations; • She self-harms; • She demonstrates disruptive behaviours; • The parents seek support in their parental role; [ 7 ] Despite the services put in place, there is little durable change.

In point of fact, the youth’s disruptive behaviours increase as she resists the interventions and continues to self-harm. [ 8 ] Diagnosed with multiple psychological disorders, she ceases taking the medications prescribed to support her emotional stability.

[ 9 ] In March 2021, the youth attempts suicide by ingestion of her prescribed medication. She leaves a note to her father, explaining her decision. Subsequently, she seeks medical attention and verbalizes wanting to die. [ 10 ] She is qualified as presenting a severe imminent risk to herself. [ 11 ] Her parents, collaborative and implicated, are largely powerless before the intensity of their daughter’s distress. [ 12 ] In this context, it is decided to proceed to her provisional placement in a rehabilitation centre. [ 13 ] Initially, the youth shows little progress in this setting.

She continues to reject the interventions while being oppositional and sometimes even aggressive. Her emotional state remains unstable. [ 14 ] Progressively, this situation improves as the youth becomes more open to meetings and starts to show introspection as to her situation and her triggers. [ 15 ] She sees her parents on a weekly basis and returns to school. Safety plans are in place to ensure her safety and support her functioning. Although some issues arise, all agree that there is an overall positive progression. [ 16 ] The parents remain collaborative, although their communication together is strained.

This co-parenting issue can contribute to their daughter’s already significant burdens. [ 17 ] The Court endorses the conclusions sought as being in the youth’s best interests as well as respecting the objectives of the law.

FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 18 ] GRANTS the application for protection; [ 19 ] DECLARES the security and the development of the youth in danger for the following reason: • Serious behavioural disturbance (article 38f) Youth Protection Act ); [ 20 ] ENTRUSTS the youth to an institution operating a rehabilitation centre chosen by the Director of Youth Protection A, for the next 6 months; [ 21 ] AUTHORIZES the partial or complete reintegration of the youth into her parental milieu in the last 60 days of the placement, should the situation allows it; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the youth and her parents be following agreement between the parties; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the parents report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures that apply in their own regard or their child’s regard to put an end at the situation in which her security or development is in danger; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the youth and her parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 25 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the adolescent and her family; [ 26 ] ALL THESE MEASURES for 1 year, except for the placement order; [ 27 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the present judgment __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Karianne Asselin Attorney for the applicant Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the youth Hearing dates: May 5 (judgment on endangerment) and June 22, 2021 (applicable measures) Date of signature: July 29, 2021