2023 QCCQ 3723, 2023 QCCQ 3723

Protection de la jeunesse — 231611 2023 QCCQ 3723 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] LOCALITY OF […] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-038939-211 Date: March 17, 2023 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on […], 2021 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre A Applicant -and- A , the mother The parent JUDGMENT Sections 95 and 95.1 of the Youth Protection Act (L.R.Q., C.

P-34.1 ) 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 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Court was presented with an Application for extension of an order rendered by the undersigned on February 8, 2022, whereby the now seventeen month-old child, X , was entrusted to her great-aunt, Ms.

B, with aid, counsel and assistance, for a period of eight months. [ 2 ] The facts alleged in support of the application for extension dated September 19, 2022, are as follows: 3.1. the child has remained entrusted to her paternal grant-aunt, Ms. B; 3.2. the child is thriving in Ms. B’s care and is meeting all her developmental milestones; 3.3. Ms.

B has been accepted as a kinship foster home; 3.4. the family has been receiving the services of an educator; 3.5. in May 2022, the delegate observed the mother’s home to be unkempt; 3.6. the delegate also noticed a broken window, bathroom door and other damaged items; 3.7. the mother stated that this would have occurred due to a fight with friends visiting the apartment; 3.8. the mother does not acknowledge that she has mental health issues; 3.9. the mother has not received follow-up to address her mental-health and substance abuse; 3.10. the mother and child have weekly supervised visits, twice per week; 3.11. the mother was observed to not respond appropriately to the child’s needs; 3.12. the maternal grandmother has monthly visits with the child; 3.13. a permanent plan is needed for the child (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 3 ] On November 25, 2022, the Director filed an Application for revision and Application for provisional measures alleging the following: 3.1. the child has remained with the paternal grant-aunt, Ms.

B;

3.2. the child has weekly supervised visits with the mother, twice per week; 3.3. during supervised visits, the mother is verbally aggressive towards the workers in the presence of the child; 3.4. the mother is easily distracted by her cellular phone and does not engage with the child; 3.5. on November 8, 2022, the mother became aggressive and began yelling at the worker; 3.6. on said day, the mother assaulted a supervisor by hitting and biting her and had to be restrained by the worker; 3.7. the mother was arrested and has criminal conditions not to be in the presence of the supervisor; 3.8. the mother refuses to engage in services to address her mental health; 3.9. the child is fearful of the mother and often cries in her presence; 3.10. at this time, the minimum of one contact a week with the mother is not benefiting the child (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 4 ] In light of the foregoing, the Director recommends that the child remain entrusted to the kinship foster home of her great-aunt, Ms.

B, with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, until she reaches the age of majority, on […], 2039. [ 5 ] The mother, assisted by Me Pelletier, denied many of the allegations and opposed the child’s placement.

She argued that her daughter should be returned to her care with adequate support services. [ 6 ] The child’s father is not declared on her birth certificate. [ 7 ] Me Rodriguez-Melka, on behalf of the child, made no admissions but approved of the measures proposed by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 8 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-9 and D-10 as evidence: D-9: 95 Court Report, written by [Social Worker 2], dated July 27, 2022; D-10: Addendum I, prepared by [Social Worker 1], dated February 2, 2023. [ 9 ] In

summary, the mother feels her daughter should be returned to her care although she admittedly has no concerns regarding the care her daughter is receiving from her great-aunt. [ 10 ] The mother’s testimony shows an extremely limited understanding of the situation and of her own inability to meet her daughter’s needs. In her own words, she had the baby and now it seems everyone is “having fun” with her baby, without her.

She says she feels “jealous”, “like everyone is having a big party with my kid without me”. [ 11 ] The mother failed to provide any evidence whatsoever of any steps to address the concerns described in the previous court order. [ 12 ] On the contrary, her impulsive behavior caused visits with her daughter to be decreased since the last court order: On November 8, 2022, Ms. A physically assaulted Ms. [Social Worker 2]’s supervisor, Ms. C during a supervised visit. Ms. A was asked to focus on feeding X rather than on her cellphone or arguing with Ms. [Social Worker 2]. Ms.

A was arrested on December 26, 2022 and released on December 27, 2022, with an interdiction of contact with Ms. C. Ms. A can no longer present at the DYP office located at […], City A. [1] [ 13 ] Moreover, the mother’s disorganized thinking prevented her from completing the most basic tasks to meet her daughter’s needs such as registering her for daycare or providing her medicare card. [ 14 ] Although the mother is consistent in attending scheduled visits with her child, she cannot independently address her daughter’s needs and resists any coaching: For the most part, visits to not go well. Ms.

A does not understand a child’s development and thus is not able to respond to her daughter’s need appropriately. […] Ms. A becomes upset, verbally aggressive when cued regarding her parenting styles. [2] […] similar concerns have been observed regarding Ms. A lack of understanding of X’s needs and responding to her needs appropriately. For example, When X is crying or making fussy noises, in stead of understanding what signal X sent for and responding to it, Ms. A would mimic X. The visit supervisor would have to regularly direct Ms. A repeatedly what to do in these situations. During visits, Ms.

A repeatedly used louder and frustrated tones when X was in distress; the visit supervisor had to intervene regularly. [Program A] also raised the same concern regarding the feeding and after feeding issues [3] (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 15 ] As summarized in the Court Report it is evident that:

[…] Ms. A lacks maturity and insight in to the responsibilities of being a parent to a vulnerable child, and refuses guidance to improve her parenting skills. [4] [ 16 ] The child has been with her great-aunt virtually since birth. Given the mother’s serious limitations and the absence of any reasonable prospect of improvement, the Director is justified in arguing for a permanent plan for the child. [ 17 ] The child’s great-aunt has been meeting all her needs and the child is thriving in her care: X has remained entrusted to her paternal great-aunt Ms. B where her basic needs are being appropriately met. Ms.

B three adult children also reside in the home. X has her own bedroom. X is thriving in Ms.

B’s care and meeting all her developmental milestones. [5] [ 18 ] She is monitored for symptoms of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and no concerns have been reported to date. [ 19 ] The quality of care provided by the great-aunt is not disputed and the evidence establishes her attachment and long-term commitment towards the child. [ 20 ] Although the maternal grandmother would like the child entrusted to her care, the child’s interest lies in preserving the stability she has enjoyed with her great-aunt. [ 21 ] Moreover, the intensely conflictual relationship between the mother and the grandmother makes it unthinkable to entrust the child to the maternal grandmother: In the past year, Ms.

A threatened to physically harm her mother or call the police on her during visits with X. Ms. A has consistently voiced that Ms. D does not care about her and should not be considered as a potential caregiver for X. On June 28, 2022, upon leaving her supervised visit, Ms. A was seen assaulting Ms. D in the parking lot by [Centre A] worker. Due to their contentious and at times violent relationship, Ms. A and Ms.

D they are now provided with separate visits with X. [6] [ 22 ] Under the circumstances, the evidence clearly establishes that the application is well-founded and that the recommendations are in the child’s interest. THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 23 ] GRANTS the application; [ 24 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child, X , remain in danger under the Youth Protection Act ; AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE CHILD 'S INTEREST TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 25 ] ORDERS that the child remain entrusted to the kinship foster home of her paternal great-aunt, Ms.

B; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the child and her mother be determined by the Director of Youth Protection, including supervision if deemed necessary; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the child and her maternal grandmother be determined by the Director of Youth Protection, including supervision if deemed necessary; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the child receive all health care services required by her condition, including close monitoring for symptoms of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and related services if required; [ 29 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother follow though with support services to address her mental health, substance use, and parenting skills, and follow the recommendations of treating professionals; [ 30 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to exchange relevant information with treating professionals working with the family; [ 31 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to apply for the child’s Medicare card; [ 32 ] WITHDRAWS from the mother the exercise of certain attributes of parental authority pertaining to the child’s medical, dental and educational needs, including daycare, as well as extracurricular activities and travel, including the passport application, and SIN application, and GRANTS the exercise of these attributes to the child’s paternal great-aunt, Ms.

B; [ 33 ] ORDERS that a person working for the Centre A provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her family; [ 34 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X , to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre A , who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 35 ] THE WHOLE until she reaches the age of majority, on […], 2039.

Signed on March 17, 2023 TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. Me Dominique Douglas Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Lola Rodriguez-Melka Attorney for the child Me François Pelletier Attorney for the mother TD/vl