2016 QCCQ 4944, 2016 QCCQ 4944

Protection de la jeunesse — 162954 2016 QCCQ 4944 JO0374 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] Youth Division No: 525-41-028924-140 525-41-028925-147 DATE : January 19, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE KAREN OHAYON, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE CASE OF: X, born […], 2009 Y, born […], 2004 Director of Youth Protection of A Youth and Family Centres Applicant A Father B Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95, Y.P.A.) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING : Within the framework of the Youth Protection Act, no person may publish or broadcast information allowing 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 (Y.P.A. sections 11.2.2 and 135). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection is asking the Court to extend the order rendered on January 19, 2015, thereby maintaining Y and X in the care of their parents in accordance with a shared custody agreement, along with various corrective measures. [ 2 ] Both parents admit the majority of the allegations and consent to the extension of the measures as proposed. [ 3 ] Through his lawyer, Y admits all of the allegations except for those pertaining to his alleged sexualized behaviour and he expresses wanting an end to the Director’s involvement in his life.

The state of endangerment [ 4 ] Essentially, the evidence establishes the following: [ 5 ] Since the prior court order, Y’s behaviour problems have increased both in frequency and in severity. [ 6 ] At A Elementary School, he has been described as aggressive, disrespectful and disruptive. As a result, he has been required to change settings. [ 7 ] He was also expelled for the same reasons from the A Boys and Girls Club which provides after school care.

Although the mother tried to secure the services of another after school program, she was unsuccessful given Y’s personal difficulties. [ 8 ] A number of interventions, including psycho-educational and family therapy have been attempted but have failed as a result of Y’s unmanageable behaviour. An evaluation at the Jewish General Hospital concludes that he suffers from conduct disorder as well as attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity. [ 9 ] Y now attends B school which provides a more structured environment as well as access to specialized services to address his needs.

His behaviour has improved somewhat although certain difficulties persist. For instance, he has been suspended twice from the bus service as a result of aggressive behaviour towards both a fellow student and the bus driver. [ 10 ] This past summer, he was expelled from camp after a series of aggressive and defiant actions.

[ 11 ] At home, Y’s behaviour is described as follows: “Y’s ongoing difficulties include: physical and verbal aggression toward Ms.

B and X; aggressive behaviour and difficulty following rules and expectations across multiple settings including home, school, day camp, school bus and after-school programs; single-minded obsession with playing mostly violent video games to the exclusion of other physical and social activities; difficulty sleeping at night; difficulty in regulating his emotions, especially anger, which often results in violent outbursts feeding his aggression; and sexualized behaviour exhibited by exposing himself to his mother and aunt and masturbating in their presence.

In addition, Y’s reaction to, and relationship with, women in general is dismissive, denigrating and oppositional. [1] ” [ 12 ] Furthermore, there is concern that Y’s aggressive behaviour towards X is causing the latter to react in kind. Recently, X has been exhibiting behaviour problems that can be described as follows: “X’s difficulties have been of recent origin. He has been observed by the undersigned and other professionals to engage at times in regressive behaviours, i.e., sucking his thumb, squirming in mother’s lap, etc. Ms.

B reports that X has increasingly become verbally and physically violent with her, hitting her and throwing objects at her. When limits are set and he gets frustrated, X tends to throw temper tantrums that sometimes last 20 minutes. [2] ” [ 13 ] X’s difficulties in respecting limits have also been noticed at school where his behaviour is becoming increasingly problematic. [ 14 ] With the parents’ agreement, the custody arrangements were modified so as to separate the brothers in order to ensure X’s safety. This was meant to be a temporary measure.

However, efforts to restore the original custody measures have failed. Y has become increasingly violent towards his mother and currently resides with his father on a full time basis while X continues to see his father one week out of two. [ 15 ] The mother has had very little contact with Y over the past two months. She expresses wanting to revert back to the temporary arrangement of shared custody while keeping the boys separated on alternating weeks. She clearly wishes to regain shared custody of Y while ensuring X’s safety.

Although this desire is understandable, a gradual progression is called for given the recent circumstances. [ 16 ] The youth protection worker has explained that temporary adjustments to the custody arrangements continue to be attempted on a trial and error basis in the hopes of finding the best solution. The parties have managed to reach agreements in the past and it is expected that they will continue to do so as the situation develops. [ 17 ] During the course of the past year, the father’s cooperation with social services has been mitigated.

Regarding the state of the parent’s relationship, there has been no significant improvement. The worker states: “The therapists attributed the lack of improvement to Mr. A’s overall denial that Y has any significant behavioural problems, and to his minimization and justification of those difficulties that he acknowledged. Mr. A also expressed negative views of the therapeutic efforts and professionals involved in the case.

Another factor cited was the on-going conflict between the parents which made it impossible to agree on common working objectives and solutions. [3] ” [ 18 ] In fact, a referral to the Day Program at the Jewish General Hospital was rejected as a result of the ongoing conflict between the parents. It was feared that a lack of consistent cooperation would undermine the treatment plan. [ 19 ] At the hearing, the father emphasizes that he has no difficulties when the boys are in his care. He reluctantly concedes however that Y’s difficulties transcend the mother’s home environment.

He also agrees that Y’s particularly violent behaviour towards his mother is cause for concern and unacceptable under any circumstance. [ 20 ] The Court is especially troubled by the lack of progress over the past year. Y’s behaviour problems have intensified and the mother’s testimony describing a recent incident in her home involving both boys is deeply disturbing.

This incident equally highlights how X’s behaviour is also deteriorating and must be addressed accordingly. [ 21 ] Considering the evidence presented, the Court concludes that the security and development of the children continues to be endangered for the reasons alleged by the Director. The measures [ 22 ] The youth protection worker proposes an extension of the current measures, with various minor modifications, for a period of one year.

The objectives remain the same and can be summarized as follows: - to encourage the father to acknowledge the seriousness of Y’s behaviour problems and to collaborate with professionals; - to assist both parents to communicate effectively and to co-parent without exposing the children to conflict; - to ensure that both homes provide appropriate structure, routine and discipline; - to provide the services required to manage the behaviour problems exhibited by the children; - to provide the health services required by the children, in particular, psycho-social therapy. [ 23 ] At the father’s initiative, Y has recently resumed art therapy and X has since begun the same program but with a different therapist. [ 24 ] Currently, Y’s behaviour represents a significant challenge.

The Court is well aware of the important obstacles that lie ahead. A sustained effort on the part of both parents in conjunction with the youth protection worker will be required if any progress is to be achieved.

[ 25 ] Mental health services are a key component to the intervention plan and cohesive parental cooperation is essential in that regard. [ 26 ] The parents are encouraged to unify their efforts in the interest of their children. [ 27 ] X’s potential for progress remains closely connected to Y’s evolution.

The rela-tionship between the brothers as well as Y’s influence on X must be monitored closely. [ 28 ] After considering all of the evidence, and taking into account the consent of the parties, the Court concludes that the measures proposed by the Director are in the children’s best interest. [ 29 ] FOR THESE REASONS, [ 30 ] THE COURT: [ 31 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 32 ] DECLARES that the security and development of both children continue to be endangered for the motives initially declared; [ 33 ] EXTENDS the decision rendered on January 19, 2015; [ 34 ] ENTRUSTS the children to the care of their parents; [ 35 ] TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE of their consent, ORDERS that both parents seek and receive individual support and services to address their parenting and personal issues; [ 36 ] ORDERS that both parents not expose the children to their conflicts; [ 37 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents continue to ensure that the children receive mental health services to address their behaviours; [ 38 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that both parents agree not to discuss with the children the relevancy of them having to attend therapy nor the medication nor the content of the therapy; [ 39 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents develop an effective way of communication while exchanging information regarding their children; [ 40 ] TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE of the parents’ consent, AUTHORIZES the DYP to obtain and share pertinent and necessary information with any treating professional or support services; [ 41 ] ORDERS that a person working for a Child and Youth Protection Centre provide aid, counsel and assistance to the children and their family; [ 42 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children X and Y to the Director of Youth Protection of A Youth and Family Centres, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 43 ] THE WHOLE for a period of one year.

SIGNED IN TOWN A On January 28, 2016 __________________________________ KAREN OHAYON, J.C.Q. Isabelle Loranger Attorney for the D.Y.P. Sonia Harvey Attorney for the children Dinah Oliel Attorney for the mother Date of hearing: January 19, 2016 KO/lf