2016 QCCQ 14334, 2016 QCCQ 14334

Protection de la jeunesse — 166469 2016 QCCQ 14334 JN 0300 COURT OF QUÉBEC YOUTH DIVISION CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] N o : 525-41-028172-146 DATE: March 2, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING JUDGE: THE HONOURABLE JACQUES A.

NADEAU, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION A Director and X (born on [...], 2004), Child and A, Mother and B, Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON MOTION FOR REVISION AND EXTENSION (Section 95 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcasting of any information that may lead to the identification of a child or of his parents.

Any person who contravenes this provision commits an offence and is liable to a fine (Sections 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 of the Y.P.A. ). [ 1 ] The Court intends, by this judgment, to confirm in writing its reasons for the decision rendered during the hearing held on March 2 nd , 2016. [ 2 ] The Court is seized of a Motion for Revision and Extension filed pursuant to Subsections 95 (1) and (2) of the Youth Protection Act by a person duly mandated by the Director of the [Centre A] (hereafter, " the Director ") on December 2 nd , 2015, to revise and extend the orders rendered by the undersigned on December 4 th , 2014.

[ 3 ] Since this judgment was rendered, X and his brother Y have lived in their father's care while enjoying regular visits with their mother. [ 4 ] It appears that the conflictual relationship between the parents is still ongoing. Indeed, the father has continued to denigrate the mother, on occasion, in the presence of X and his brother.

The father wants the mother to get more involved in the care of the children. [ 5 ] The father recognizes that he occasionally resorts to physical discipline to amend X's and his brother's behaviours. [ 6 ] X has stated being at times scared of his father and of his reactions depending on his mood. [ 7 ] The father has not been collaborating with the social follow-up on a consistent basis. [ 8 ] On December 3 rd , 2015, the Court maintains all of the measures rendered on December 4 th , 2014, until the hearing of the Motion for Revision and Extension . [ 9 ] On March 2 nd , 2016, as a principal measure, the Director recommends that the child be entrusted to the care of both parents for a period of one (1) year.

The Director also recommends other measures which are sought to resolve the situation which has put the security and development of the child in danger , as appears from Addendum 1 filed as Exhibit D-7. [ 10 ] The parents are present at the hearing and despite being informed of their right to representation by an attorney, they elect to proceed without such assistance. [ 11 ] The mother proceeds to make certain admissions and agrees with the measures proposed by the Director. [ 12 ] As for the father, he makes a number of admissions but is rather ambivalent regarding the Director's involvement in the family's situation. [ 13 ] The child’s attorney proceed to make admissions on behalf of her client and declares that she agrees with the measures sought by the Director, while adding that the child would like to spend more time with his mother. [ 14 ] ANALYSIS OF THE EVIDENCE AND DECISION [ 15 ] Although X and his brother engage in verbal and physical altercations which require parental intervention, the parents have to understand that such situations are best dealt with by removal of privileges rather than by physical discipline. [ 16 ] The involvement of an educator in the home setting to assist the parents in establishing consistent routines, structures and methods of discipline between each household can be of benefit to the family. [ 17 ] As was mentioned in the Court's previous judgment, the key to resolving the situation of endangerment of X's security and development is to establish a co-parenting system under which both parents can communicate effectively for the benefit of X and his brother. [ 18 ] It appears that the mother agrees with the father's request to undertake an equal share in the rearing of X and his brother and is now in a position to do so. [ 19 ] Hopefully, this compromise can bring about the changes required so that X is no longer exposed to the major conflict of loyalty which he has been subjected to since his parents' separation. [ 20 ] After having received the admissions and taken into consideration the position of the parties, the testimonies heard, as well as the reports filed in the Court record, the Court concludes that the preponderance of the evidence establishes that the security and development of the child are still in danger pursuant to the Youth Protection Act . [ 21 ] The Court is also of the opinion that the measures proposed by the Director are in the interest of the child. [ 22 ] AS A RESULT AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT HEREBY: [ 23 ] GRANTS the Motion for Revision and Extension ; [ 24 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child, X, are still in danger pursuant to the Youth Protection Act ; [ 25 ] AND PURSUANT TO THE POWERS GRANTED UNDER

SECTION 91 OF THE YOUTH PROTECTION ACT , THE COURT: [ 26 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to both parents; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the parents refrain from denigrating one another in the presence of the child; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the parents refrain from any form of verbal or physical abuse towards the child; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the parents and the child work with the educator designated by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 31 ] ORDERS that the parents report periodically, namely bi-weekly, to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply to put an end to the situation which has resulted in the security and development of the child being in danger;

[ 32 ] ORDERS that a person working for a Child and Youth Protection Centre provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and their family; [ 33 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that an " éducateur de milieu " will remain assigned to the situation of the child as long as necessary; [ 34 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the social worker currently involved in this matter remain assigned to the situation of the child for the duration of this court order; [ 35 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X, to the Director of Youth Protection A, for the purposes of executing the measures ordered by the Court; [ 36 ] ORDERS the execution of this judgment by any peace officer, if necessary; [ 37 ] ALL OF THESE MEASURES will be in force for a period of one (1) year.

Signed and filed on May 2 nd , 2016 _______________________________________ JACQUES A. NADEAU, J.C.Q. Mtre François St-Marie AF7247 Attorney for the Director Mtre Michelle Robidoux Attorney for the children Hearing date: March 2 nd , 2016 JAN/mcl