2012 QCCQ 17945, 2012 QCCQ 17945

Protection de la jeunesse — 127406 2012 QCCQ 17945 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] « Youth Division N° : 760-41-004340-124 DATE : November 12, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE L’HONORABLE JEAN GRAVEL ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILD: X, born on […], 1996 Child v. [SOCIAL WORKER 1] Petitioner and A Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUGEMENT (article 38 de la L.P.J.) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] In accordance with

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act, the Court is seized of a motion to have the security and development of X declared in danger for the reasons appearing in paragraph of the motion. [ 2 ] With consent and to serve as evidence, the Director of Youth Protection filed various exhibits (D-1 to D-4) in the record, as the minutes of the hearing show. [ 3 ] The mother made admissions in support of paragraph 3 of the motion: a)denied; b)c), admitted; d)e)f)ignore; g)admitted; h)ignore; i)j)denied; k)l)ignore.

The mother agreed with the measures sought. [ 4 ] Through his attorney, the child admits all of the allegations.

The child agreed with the measures sought. [ 5 ] The Director of Youth Protection alleges that the security and development of X are in danger for the following reasons: ⇒ On May 15 th 2012, your petitioner has determined that the security and development of the child was compromised in virtue of educative neglect (inappropriate reaction from the mother to the child behaviours; ⇒ The mother and the child left the country during the summer to be close to their family; ⇒ Since the beginning of the school, your petition try on many occasions to reach the mother without success; ⇒ On October 3 rd 2012, the child contacted your petitioner asking to meet him; ⇒ On the same day, at school, your petitioner received the following verbalization of the child; .1.

That her mother did not respect the agreement on the house rules; .2. That her mother refused to let her in the house at least thirty (3) minutes per day; .3. That October 2 nd 2012, the child wait outside for approximately two (2) hours; .4. That her mother does not give her any money or food when she is at home and at school; .5. That her mother took out the lights in her room; ⇒ The school counselor confirmed that the school gave food to the child regularly; ⇒ Since October 6 th 2012, the child lives at Ms.

B who is the mother of her friend; ⇒ Since the aforementioned date, the child try to reach her mother without success and try to go at home and did not received any

answer; ⇒ The child need to pick up her personnel effects at her mother's place; ⇒ On October 9 th and 16 th 2012, your petitioner let two (2) letters at the mother's apartment; ⇒ Your petitioner did not received any news from the mother; ⇒ The child functioned well at school and at Ms B's house. [ 6 ] X is a 16 year old adolescent.

She lived with her grandparents in [country A] for the first years of her life. [ 7 ] The mother took responsibility for X in the last years but does not exercise her parental role in a convenient way. [ 8 ] Last May 2012 the Director of Youth Protection had to intervene due to the reaction from the mother to the child behaviours. [ 9 ] The rules that were accepted by the mother and the child after discussion with the Director were not respected by the mother. [ 10 ] The mother did not implicate herself and was reluctant with the social intervention. [ 11 ] Mother underlines that she had problems with her telephone and that it was difficult to get in touch with her. [ 12 ] Mother does agree that her child need the support of the DYP but does not exactly know how her child is doing or behaving since she was entrusted to the mother of her daughter's friend. [ 13 ] The child is ambivalent whether she wants to go live with her grandmother in [country A] or go back with her mother. [ 14 ] X needs stability.

She seems to have found a certain degree of stability in her new environment. [ 15 ] THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS the present motion; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X are in danger; [ 18 ] ENTRUSTS the child X to Ms. B; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the child X and her mother undertake an active

part in the application of the measures designed to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is in danger; [ 20 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counseling or assistance to X and her family for a period of one (1) year; [ 21 ] ENTRUST the situation of the child X to the Director of Youth Protection of le Centre Jeunesse A for the execution of the judgment; [ 22 ] THE WHOLE FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR. [ 23 ] THE WHOLE WITHOUT COST. __________________________________ JEAN GRAVEL , juge Cour du Québec Chambre de la jeunesse Me Caterine Caron, Counsel the DYP Me Karine Poissant, Counsel the child Date d’audience : November 12, 2012