2022 QCCQ 8605, 2022 QCCQ 8605

Protection de la jeunesse — 225796 2022 QCCQ 8605 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-41-006669-215 DATE: August 29, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X , born on [...], 2006 [1] Adolescent ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION A Applicant -and- A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON APPLICABLE MEASURES Articles 95 (1) & (2) 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 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection seeks the extension of the measures of protection in place for four months in order to ensure that the situation of the youth remains stable. [ 2 ] On May 31, 2022, the Court ratifies an agreement having intervened between the parties as to the situation of endangerment.

The hearing on the measures is continued to another date in order to better evaluate the situation. [ 3 ] The youth and her mother contest the need for further measures, claiming that their situation is in hand and that various services remain available should the need arise. [ 4 ] Although the father is absent, the Court retains that he shares the youth’s position. [ 5 ] After evaluating the evidence, the Court declares that the security and the development of the youth are no longer in danger. The following elements justify this decision.

Analysis and decision [ 6 ] The Director of Youth Protection intervenes in the youth’s situation in relation to his serious behavioural difficulties. [ 7 ] After a passage in a rehabilitation center, the youth returns to his maternal environment in March 2022. His father’s implication is limited as he resides outside the country. [ 8 ] Although issues of school attendance and anxiety remain ongoing, the youth is seen to be progressing in a positive manner.

He can still become overwhelmed but since May, he maintains a healthy balance. [ 9 ] Recently, the youth commences a psychological follow-up, which he appreciates as he wants to have strategies to deal with his social anxiety and stress. [ 10 ] With a return to school being imminent, he states to feeling more mentally prepared and is confident that school will go well. He is able to identify the resources available to him should he require help. [ 11 ] The relationship issues between the youth and his mother, which were an important foundation for the situation of endangerment, are much improved.

Notably, there has been a significant shift of the mother’s perceptions in regards to her child’s challenges, resulting in her being better able to understand and therefore respond to his needs. [ 12 ] The youth and his mother remain open to services and are able to seek what is required.

[ 13 ] While the Director recognizes that the youth is now more stable, considerations as to the durability of these, especially in view of his return to school, justify their decision to remain implicated for the next months. [ 14 ] The contentious issue surrounds the necessity to prolong the application of measures of protection.

Within its analysis, the Court cites the definition of the law as refers to the situation of endangerment (article 38 YPA): ”serious behavioural disturbance” refers to a situation in which a child behaves in such a way as to repeatedly or seriously undermine the child’s or others’ physical or psychological integrity, and the child’s parents fail to take the necessary steps to put an end to the situation or, if the child is 14 or over, the child objects to such steps. [ 15 ] The application of measures of protection is an exceptional intervention in a family’s life and must be sustained by a situation of endangerment as defined by the law. [ 16 ] The youth’s situation is certainly not perfect and his struggles remain ongoing, but considering the progression of his situation, the services in place and the mother’s capacities to ensure a safety net, such no longer attains the level required for the application of protective measures.

FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the youth are no longer in danger. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Marc Castonguay Attorney for the Applicant Me Stéphanie Castagnier Attorney for the youth Date of hearing: August 29, 2022