2021 QCCQ 15252, 2021 QCCQ 15252

Protection de la jeunesse — 219053 2021 QCCQ 15252 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] Youth Division No: 640-41-002691-217 DATE: October 21, 2021 (written judgment rendered on January 11, 2022) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2009 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C.

Applicant and A Mother and B , deceased Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) asks the Court to declare that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2009, are endangered under paragraphs (b) (1) iii and (c) [1] of

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The DYP asks that the child remain with the mother, at the exclusion of Mr. C until December 31, 2021. Position of the Parties [ 3 ] The mother is present and represented by Me Angèle Tommasel. She recognizes that the security and development of her child were endangered at the time of the writing of the application, but the situation is no longer endangered. If the Court concludes to endangerment, she agrees with the measures. [ 4 ] X is absent, but represented by Me Cassandra Neptune. He recognizes that his security and development are endangered under

section 38 (c), but not under

section 38 (b) (1) iii. He agrees with the measures. [ 5 ] X has 2 siblings, Y (3 years) and Z (7 years). The Court is also seized with their situations. Facts [ 6 ] The family is known from the DYP since a few months now as an agreement on voluntary measures was signed in January 2020. The reason for the DYP intervention was the alcohol consumption of the mother and her spouse and their conjugal violence issues. [ 7 ] The mother asserts that the children never witnessed any conjugal violence event. [ 8 ] On January 27, 2021, the police had to intervene in the family house.

The mother’s spouse would have assaulted the mother with a knife in the presence of the child. He was arrested, and he is still detained. [ 9 ] The mother testifies honestly saying that for her the relation is over and she does not plan to resume her relation once Mr. C will be released. The DYP continues to be afraid about this assertion because a few weeks ago, the mother was hesitant about her relation. Also, even if the DYP trusts the mother about her current intention, the DYP has concerns regarding the capacity of the mother to impose her limits to Mr.

C. [ 10 ] The mother also affirms that she drastically reduced her alcohol consumption. The rare moment when she drank, she makes sure that her children were well babysat.

[ 11 ] The DYP worker confirms that the mother is proactive to seek help. Unfortunately, due to the lack of staff at the Social Services, the delay to receive such services are very long and the intensity of service is not as much as we would like. [ 12 ] The mother testifies with a lot of emotions. She suffers from many traumas, but she wants to take care of her safety and to live a happy life with her children. She recognizes that the DYP is helpful, but she also wants to end the service because she is tired.

Analysis [ 13 ] The evidence shows that the children witnessed a lot of violence in their family environment and the alcohol consumption of the mother prevent her from supervising them properly. [ 14 ] The mother made very great efforts since the beginning of the DYP intervention. She has the desire and the motivation to continue in this way.

The Court understand that she could be tired of having the DYP in her life, but the situation remains fragile and the DYP’s presence is still necessary. [ 15 ] Indeed, even if the Court trusts the mother’s intentions and her willingness, the Court ignores what kind of pressure Mr. C will impose to her when he is released. Considering that the Social Services are not able to offer proper services to her, this young lady deserves to be supported to achieve her goals by the DYP services.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS the application; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2009, are endangered under paragraphs (b) (1) iii and (

c) of

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to the mother, at the exclusion of Mr. C; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the mother and Mr. C report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in the child’s regard to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is endangered; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the mother and Mr. C take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the modalities, the frequency, and the degree of supervision of the contacts between the child and Mr.

C be determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 22 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or a body, provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the family; [ 23 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X , to the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C. who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 24 ] THE WHOLE until October 31, 2022. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Adèle Cyr, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Me Angèle Tommasel, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: October 21, 2021