2018 QCCQ 19457, 2018 QCCQ 19457

Protection de la jeunesse — 1810769 2018 QCCQ 19457 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 635-41-000846-185 DATE: October 29, 2018 (written judgment rendered on December 4, 2018) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2012 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] and [SOCIAL WORKER 2], Youth Protection workers, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...] Applicants and A , residing and domiciled at [...] Mother and B, residing and domiciled at [...] ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 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 extend the decision rendered on January 30, 2018, regarding the child X, born on [...], 2012.

At that date, the Court declared the security and development of X in danger [1] and entrusted her to a foster family with a reintegration with the mother if the situation allows it. [ 2 ] The Director submits that the situation does not allow to return the child to her mother and recommends that the child be entrusted to her maternal grandmother, Ms. C, with a reintegration with the mother if the situation allows it.

Position of the parties [ 3 ] The mother is absent because she went to Town A to escort a family member to the hospital and the delay was too short to allow her to come back and be present for the court hearing. She gave a mandate to Me Tommasel to represent her in her absence. By the voice of her lawyer, she admits the alleged facts and she agrees with the measures. [ 4 ] The father is absent but represented by Me Léonard. He also admits most of the facts, and he agrees with the measures. [ 5 ] X, who is now 6 years old, is not present but represented by Me Neptune.

After hearing the evidence, her lawyer invites the Court to grant the application and the measures requested. Facts [ 6 ] The parents are separated since 2014, and the child lives with her maternal grandparents since that date. The parents displayed alcohol consumption and violence problems. [ 7 ] The mother gets involved in a new violent relationship. She gave birth to Y who was entrusted to a foster family. [ 8 ] After her separation with Y’s father, the mother went to live at the grandparents’ place. The grandfather deceased in 2017, and the grandmother had health problems requiring stays in Town A.

The mother was not able to take care of the child so she was entrusted in the same foster family as Y for a while and to another one in another village. [ 9 ] In January 2018, Justice Lecompte, declared the security and the development of X in danger and entrusted her to a foster family with a progressive reintegration with the mother, the whole until October 31 st , 2018. [ 10 ] No long after this judgment, the child was entrusted to her maternal grandmother, Ms. C. X is doing very well. The school confirms to the DYP worker that the child attends school regularly and always on time.

The school also confirms that X is very well taken care at her grandmother’s.

[ 11 ] The Court notes that the information provided by the DYP worker comes exclusively from the school because he is not welcome at the grandmother’s place so he never went since the child is entrusted there. Moreover, the maternal grandmother is not recognized as foster home because she is also followed by the DYP but for reason that does not currently put X at risk.

Questioned by the Tribunal, the worker admits that he realized recently that the last judgment entrusted the child to a foster family but considering the date of this revision was close, he decided not to seize the Court to modify the decision and to continue as it, knowing the court order was not respected. [ 12 ] After few months not being reachable by the DYP worker, the mother mobilizes herself and shows she really wants her daughter back under her care. She is occupying two jobs to be able to provide financially for her children. She is still living at the grandmother’s place but waiting for her own house.

No events of alcohol or drug consumption are reported since the last judgment. Her situation improved mostly since her ex-boyfriend is incarcerated. [ 13 ] The worker explains that he would appreciate that the mother be more collaborative with him but the evidence shows that he is not really proactive to initiate contacts and meetings with the mother. He is aware that she goes to Social Services to seek help for her consumption problem. [ 14 ] The DYP considers that the reintegration could be imminent if the mother continues to seek help through Social Services regarding alcohol issues and violent relationship.

Analysis [ 15 ] According to the evidence and the admissions, the Court considers the situation of X is still in danger. The measures required are in the interest of the child but the Court reminds that the DYP needs to have access to the resource where the child is entrusted to in order to provide aid, counselling and assistance to the family and to communicate the relevant information to the Tribunal.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS this application; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child X, born on [...], 2012, continue to be in danger; [ 18 ] ENTRUSTS X to her maternal grandmother, Ms.

C; [ 19 ] AUTHORIZES the child’s reintegration with the mother as soon as the situation allows it; [ 20 ] ORDERS the parents to report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in their child’s regard to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the child are in danger; [ 21 ] ORDERS the parents to take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 22 ] ORDERS the parents to remain sober and without any violent behaviour in the presence of the child; [ 23 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother continue to address her substance abuse problem; [ 24 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother participate in a follow-up for victims of conjugal violence; [ 25 ] RECOMMENDS to the father to seek help through the Social Services for his personal issues; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and the parents be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as to their modalities, their frequency and the degree of supervision; [ 27 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counselling and assistance to the child, the parents and the grandmother until October 31, 2019; [ 28 ] ORDERS the clerk of the Court of Quebec, Youth Division to notify this decision to the Commission des Droits de la Personne et des Droits de la Jeunesse; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X, to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Geneviève Apollon, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Me Angèle Tommasel, attorney for the mother

Me Marianne Léonard, attorney for the father Date of hearing: October 29, 2018