2017 QCCQ 14442, 2017 QCCQ 14442

Protection de la jeunesse — 176220 2017 QCCQ 14442 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 145-41-000519-162 DATE: June 7, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant -and- X born on [...], 2006 Child -and- A -and- B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ JA1013 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 revise and extend the order rendered on January 6, 2017, in respect of the child. Her twin sister is aimed by the same request. The parties agree to present common evidence. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the mother is present but not represented. She agrees with the measures proposed by the DYP. On the child’s side, she is absent but her counsel also expresses her consent with the conclusions of the application.

Both parties consents to the filing of the report as value the testimony of its author. [ 3 ] The father is not present during the hearing, even though he was duly served on May 24, 2017. [ 4 ] At the time of the intervention of the DYP on May 11, 2016, the child needed a stable and structured environment without alcohol drugs or domestic violence. Since the last court order rendered on January 6, 2017, the situation evolved in regards to the mother’s situation. [ 5 ] Even if in the beginning of the measure, the mother did not seem to get seriously involved with services, it changed starting on March 2017.

In fact, she initiated regular contact with the professional services and shared that information without hesitation. She attends her meetings and goes to most of her scheduled appointment. [ 6 ] The mother made tremendous changes in her life. She made sure that her home environment is free from addictions and lateral violence. On March 2017, she started a full-time job as a clerk in a store. Overall, she is doing well. [ 7 ] She attended regular visits with her daughters and she provided support and assistance to the paternal aunt acting as foster family. [ 8 ] The child is ten years old.

She is very sociable and talkative. She likes living with her paternal aunt but she shares being ready to go back live with her mother. She is excited to return in the maternal home and sees her mother almost every day. In school, she is doing well.

[ 9 ] Regarding the father, his lifestyle seems unstable. Since, he is not involved with services, it is impossible to know his priorities in regards of the children. Several meetings were organized between the DYP and the father in an accordance with his

schedule but he fails to attend. As of January 2017, he only came once. He does not have regular contacts with his daughter. The child is not comfortable with her father’s girlfriend. [ 10 ] The paternal aunt acting as foster family has a good and close relationship with the mother. She is very supportive and eager to assist whenever necessary.

In fact, she wants to remain actively involved and present in the children’s lifes. [ 11 ] Even if the mother is doing well, but a lot of work still remains but she is really committed to her follow-up. [ 12 ] The Youth Protection delegate mentions the following in the psychosocial report [1] dated May 16, 2017: “I believe that with continued professional services in place Ms.

A can achieve success in their own personal growth and development and provide the safety and security to achieving healthy balanced children in a secure home environment.” [ 13 ] However, the family still requires help, support and guidance and the mother is implicated in the professional services. She has the support of the DYP and the paternal aunt. She wants the best for her children and she has their best interest at heart and is willing to do whatever it takes. [ 14 ] The evidence demonstrates that the security and development of the child are still in danger.

Under the circumstances and considering the admission and consent of the parties, the application is well founded. The suggested measures appear to be in the best interest of the adolescent. FOR THESE REASONS AND THOSE EXPRESSED ORALLY AT THE HEARING, THE COURT: [ 15 ] GRANTS the application for revision and extension of order; [ 16 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still considered to be in danger according to

section 38 of the youth protection act ; [ 17 ] REVISES AND EXTENDS the Court order rendered on January 6, 2017, in the present file; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to her mother; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the child and her mother benefit from the services of an external educator; [ 20 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents participate in psychological services to help deal with personal issues; [ 21 ] RECOMMENDS that the father participates in an addiction assessment and counseling if deemed necessary by the professional responsible of the evaluation; [ 22 ] RECOMMENDS that the father participates in anger-management therapy; [ 23 ] ORDERS that contacts between the child and her father be determined following an agreement between the parties and supervised as long as deemed necessary; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the parents actively participate in the application of the measures ordered; [ 25 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and his family until June 30, 2018; [ 26 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the DYP of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A for the carrying out of the present judgment. __________________________________ CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q.

Me Louyse A. Lemieux for the applicant Me Cédric Leblanc Falardeau for the child Mrs. A the mother Mr. B

the father (absent) Date of hearing: June 7, 2017 Written judgment filed on June 22, 2017