2018 QCCQ 13765, 2018 QCCQ 13765

Protection de la jeunesse — 184170 2018 QCCQ 13765 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] LOCALITY OF […] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-0 33814-187 Date: June 8, 2018 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on [...], 2008 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A Applicant -and- A , the mother -and- B , the father The parents JUDGMENT Sections 95 and 95.1 of the Youth Protection Act (L.R.Q., C.

P-34.1 ) 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 ] JD2620 The Court hereby confirms and provides written reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of June 8, 2018, in accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act [1] . [ 2 ] The Court was presented with an Application for extension of an order rendered by the Honourable Eric Hamel, on April 26, 2017, whereby the now ten year-old child, X , was entrusted to his parents with aid, counsel and assistance, for a period of one year. [ 3 ] The Court was also presented with a similar application regarding the child’s sibling whose situation is addressed in a separate judgment. [ 4 ] The facts alleged in support of the Application for extension dated April 4, 2018, are as follows:

a) Since the last Court order, the children have remained with their parents;

b) The parents moved out twice (2) because they did not paid their rent on time;

c) In November 2017, the parents ended their relationship and the father moved out;

d) In November 2017, the mother was unable to pay the rent on time, therefore she moved out;

e) Since November 2017, the children have mostly remained with their mother;

f) Since November 2017, the children have benefitted from telephone calls with their father every evening; however, their physical contacts are irregular;

g) In February 2017, the mother and the children had to leave their apartment;

h) In February 2017, there were three (3) weeks during which the children were out of school;

i) At this time, the child Skyler does not benefit from any services regarding his diagnosis;

k) Hygiene has improved for both children; however, the parents have failed to provide the necessary winter clothing required, so the school had to provide it;

l) The parents offer an inconsistent collaboration with the Youth Protection services (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 5 ] In light of the foregoing, the Director recommends that the child remain entrusted to his parents, with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, for a period of eight months. [ 6 ] The mother was absent at the hearing. She wrote a letter explaining that she could not attend the hearing because she could not afford to miss any work.

However, she added that she understands the reasons for the Director of Youth Protection’s involvement and is in full agreement with the proposed measures. Consequently, the Court proceeded in her absence. [ 7 ] The father, who chose to proceed without the assistance of legal counsel, admitted most of the alleged facts and consented to the proposed measures.

However, he suggested that the Court order be made for a period of one year. [ 8 ] Me Cloutier, on behalf of the child, made no admissions but approved of the measures proposed by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 9 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-6 to D-8 as evidence: D-6: Authorization to act given by the Director of Youth Protection ; D-7: Report of the Court of Quebec, written by [social Worker 1], dated on May 29, 2018; D-8: Letter of the mother dated June 5, 2018. [ 10 ] In

summary, the need for ongoing Director of Youth Protection involvement for the alleged reasons is admitted and the parties approve of the proposed measures. [ 11 ] The father explained that his health is still fragile. He suffered a heart attack and is waiting for a heart transplant. [ 12 ] He sees his children on the weekends and is very concerned about their safety and welfare, more particularly regarding their possible exposure to negative influences in their mother’s home. [ 13 ] The parents’ relationship has ended definitively and the father claims that they are “toxic” for each other.

He feels that one of his sons has withdrawn significantly in recent months and is caught in a loyalty bind. [ 14 ] In addition, the father expressed concerns for the child’s health because he is overweight. [ 15 ] The parents will need to be more proactive in ensuring their children receive the services they need. The mother is strongly encouraged to act quickly to access additional services: Although the parents have separated […], the situation remains vulnerable as the family have limited support and show instability in different spheres of their life.

The mother will need to complete her taxes in order to receive additional funding and to be able to have access to subsidized services. [2] [ 16 ] In light of the very strained relationship between the parents and their inability to communicate effectively in their children’s interest, as expressed by the father’s testimony, a longer period than the eight months initially recommended is required to help the family redress the situation. [ 17 ] Under the circumstances, given the evidence, the Court is satisfied that the application is well-founded.

THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 18 ] GRANTS the application; [ 19 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child, X , remain in danger under the Youth Protection Act ; AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE CHILD'S INTEREST TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 20 ] ORDERS that the child remain entrusted to his parents TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE that he spends week days with his mother and weekends and holidays with his father; [ 21 ] ORDERS that contacts between the child and his father be determined by agreement between the parties with the assistance of the Director of Youth Protection given the alleged difficulties in communication between the parents; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the parents report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or their child’s regard to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is in danger; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the parents of the child take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 24 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that every effort be made to ensure that the child attends summer camp for as many weeks as possible;

[ 25 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the child be registered and participate in extra-curricular activities; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the child benefit from health care services required by his situation, more particularly that he be seen by a nutritionist; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the parents follow any recommendations that may be made; [ 28 ] ORDERS that a person working for the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and his family; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X , to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A , who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 30 ] THE WHOLE for a period of one year.

Signed on June 20, 2018 TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. Me Marie-Ève Garceau Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Francis Cloutier Attorney for the child TD/vl