2011 QCCQ 17431, 2011 QCCQ 17431

Protection de la jeunesse — 116718 2011 QCCQ 17431 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001314-100 DATE: October 11, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A C.Y.P.C., working in city A Applicant -and- X, residing and domiciled in city A, Quebec, district A Child -and- A , residing and domiciled in city A, Quebec, district A Mother -and- B, residing and domiciled in city A, Quebec, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Sec. 95 (par. 1) and 75 of the Youth Protection Act) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Court is seized with a petition for the reviewed extension of a decision rendered by Gervais J. on March 30, 2011, concerning X, born on […], 2009. [ 2 ] The child is not present but represented by counsel.

The parents are present and also represented by their lawyers. [ 3 ] The present file does not raise any litigious issue given the admissions made by most of the parties. The lawyer representing the interests of the child cannot, considering the age of the child, make any admissions. THE FACTS [ 4 ] The parents separated in Spring 2011 following an incident of conjugal violence, which led to the father's arrest. Although the mother was afraid of the father, she went back to live with him in town B. A few days later, she was victim once again of domestic violence.

She then decided to leave the father as well as the community B. She now lives in city A. [ 5 ] In May, the mother attended a five-week treatment program for her alcohol addiction in town C. During her stay at the rehabilitation centre, the mother kept contact with the Director of Youth Protection. Accordingly, a visit with her son was organized during her stay in town C. [ 6 ] Unfortunately, the mother relapsed a few weeks after completing her treatment.

This situation led to her arrest on two different occasions as she failed to comply with the conditions of an undertaking pertaining to the consumption of alcohol. The mother acknowledges her drinking stating she hasn't consumed alcohol since last July. This information is however contradicted by the applicant's evidence. The mother makes an effort to maintain contacts with her son. [ 7 ] The father is also struggling with an alcohol and drug addiction. From the evidence gathered by the applicant, the father doesn’t feel the need for specialized help. He is not convinced this has a negative impact in his life.

However, since last April he has been involved with the police on four occasions. [ 8 ] X is a two-year-old toddler developing good social skills. Finding the right foster family has been difficult. He has been living in his current foster family since June. He enjoys daycare as well as swimming activities. His language skills have also greatly improved in the past months.

MEASURES TO REVIEW [ 9 ] The Director of Youth Protection asks for a six-month placement of the child in a foster family. The father agrees with the measure. The mother also agrees, adding however that her goal is to stop drinking and address her personal issues in an effort to be a good mother to her child. [ 10 ] In support of it's recommendation, the applicant feels that a six-month placement will allow either the elaboration of a life project for X or the reintegration with the mother if the situation allows it.

In that regard, the applicant acknowledges the willingness of the mother to address her alcohol problem but believes there are emotional issues at the root of her addiction, which also have to be dealt with. [ 11 ] Although X is doing well in his current foster family, the understanding of the Court is that it is too soon to confirm the existence of a realistic long-term commitment on part of the foster family. [ 12 ]

Section 91.1 of the Youth Protection Act limits to 18 months the duration of a placement order in the case of a child the age of X. In the present case, the child has been in foster care for more than a year. The Court doesn't doubt the mother's true intentions of getting well for her son's sake. As often stated by the Court, time is of the essence. The mother has to address her inner discomfort, which leads her to consume alcohol in an excessive manner. In that sense, she has little time to put herself in action once again by attending another treatment program for her alcoholism.

This also has to be coupled with support, therapy and guidance. [ 13 ] Accordingly the proposed measure is reasonable, as it will allow the Court to determine if the mother is able to provide a safe environment for her child on the short term. Otherwise, in the best interest of X more permanent measures to assure his stability and security will have to be put in place.

Meanwhile, the Director of Youth Protection must at least verify the foster family's willingness to commit to the child on a long-term basis. [ 14 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 15 ] GRANTS the petition; [ 16 ] MAINTAINS that the security and development of X, born on […], 2009, remain endangered; [ 17 ] REVIEWS the order rendered on March 30, 2011; [ 18 ] ORDERS the placement of the child in a foster family for a period of six months; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the contacts between X and the parents be maintained and supervised by the D.Y.P. as to the frequency and modalities; [ 20 ] TAKES KNOWLEDGE of the mother intentions and therefore ORDERS her to attend treatment for her alcohol and drug addiction; [ 21 ] TAKES KNOWLEDGE of the mother intentions and ORDERS her to seek a follow up to address her emotional issues; [ 22 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling and assistance to X and his parents for a period of 12 months; [ 23 ] ORDERS the parents to collaborate with the D.Y.P. with the measures ordered by the Court; [ 24 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate in the execution of the present order; [ 25 ] ENTRUSTS the child's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing the measures ordered by the Court. __________________________________ NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q.

M e Stéphanie Lachance Cain Lamarre Casgrain Wells Lawyer for the D.Y.P. M e Yan Massé Legal Aid Lawyer for the child M e Sarah Plamondon

Lawyer for the mother M e Jacques Stuart Lawyer for the father Date of hearing: September 27, 2011