2017 QCCQ 9022, 2017 QCCQ 9022

Protection de la jeunesse — 173680 2017 QCCQ 9022 COUR DU QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE DE QUÉBEC DISTRICT DE [...] LOCALITÉ DE [...] « Chambre de la jeunesse »

N° : 525-41-031870-165 DATE : 26 avril 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ SOUS LA PRÉSIDENCE DE L’HONORABLE LUCIE GODIN ______________________________________________________________________ Dans la situation de: X Né le [...] 2009 Directrice de la protection de la jeunesse Requérante -et- B -et- C Parents mis en cause ______________________________________________________________________ JUGEMENT (Article 38 L.P.J.) ______________________________________________________________________ MISE EN GARDE : La

Loi sur la protection de la jeunesse interdit la publication ou la diffusion de toute information permettant d’identifier un enfant ou ses parents. Quiconque contrevient à cette disposition est passible d’une amende (art. 11.2, 11.2.1 et 135 L.p.j.). [ 1 ] À la demande et du consentement de toutes les parties, le Tribunal procède à une enquête commune dans la situation des enfants Y, Z, A et X. [ 2 ] Le Tribunal est saisi d’une requête en vertu de l’article 38 de la

Loi sur la protection de la jeunesse dans laquelle la requérante, Directrice de la protection de la jeunesse (DPJ), allègue que la sécurité ou le développement de l’enfant est compromis en vertu des articles 38

c) et 38 b) 2 de la

Loi sur la protection de la jeunesse . [ 3 ] En conséquence, la requérante recommande au Tribunal de confier les enfants à leur mère et d’ordonner certaines mesures visant à les protéger et à assurer leur développement dans le but ultime de corriger la situation. [ 4 ] La mère et le père admettent l’essentiel des faits allégués à la requête, en nuancent certains et en nient aussi certains d’entre eux. Par ailleurs, ils reconnaissent tous deux l’état de compromission dans lequel se trouve chacun de leurs enfants, et ce, en vertu de la

Loi sur la protection de la jeunesse. [ 5 ] Ils expriment leur accord aux mesures recommandées par la requérante. [ 6 ] Il se dégage de cette audition un esprit de collaboration et d’ouverture de la part des parents à recevoir l’aide proposée par la requérante dans le but ultime de corriger la situation. [ 7 ] Le procureur de l’enfant, après avoir entendu l’ensemble de la preuve, soumet que les recommandations de la requérante sont dans l’intérêt de chacun des enfants.

État de compromission [ 8 ] Tenant compte des admissions formulées par la mère, le père, de même que la preuve documentaire, le Tribunal conclut que la sécurité et le développement sont compromis pour les motifs allégués. [ 9 ] Le Tribunal retient les éléments suivants : [ 10 ] As relevant background information, the parents separated in May 2015, and obtained a Superior Court order granting the mother legal custody of the child while the father had weekend access rights under the supervision of the paternal grandparents; [ 11 ] Information is to the effect that said judgement was in effect until July 2016 and another hearing was set to take place on the 2 nd of November 2016, regarding a motion wherein the father requests sole custody of the child and siblings;

[ 12 ] Both parents have exposed the child to drug and alcohol abuse as well as conjugal violence; [ 13 ] The mother has had an instable lifestyle whereby she would move her family from Alberta to City A and subsequently, in the Spring/Summer of 2016, left to City B by herself, leaving the child to be cared for by the paternal grandparents; [ 14 ] In the Spring/Summer 2016, the mother did not know where she would establish a permanent home for the child; [ 15 ] The mother reports that while she was in a relationship with the father, he was verbally and physically abusive towards her in the child’s presence; [ 16 ] The mother also stated that during her relationship with the father, he would use marijuana daily; [ 17 ] The father acknowledges that both he and the mother would throw objects at each other while the child was in the home; [ 18 ] The mother has a history of not following through with engaging in services for the benefit of the child; [ 19 ] It was only in mid-June 2016, that the mother finally settled herself in City A; [ 20 ] The father has expressed a desire for the child to live in City C and learn the Mohawk language; [ 21 ] The mother and the paternal grandparents have a longstanding history of conflicts; [ 22 ] The mother and the paternal grandparents have verbally denigrated each other on numerous occasions in the presence of the child; [ 23 ] At this time, youth protection services are warranted to support the mother in caring for the child and siblings; [ 24 ] It is in the child’s best interest to remain in the mother’s care. [1] Mesures [ 25 ] Le 8 août 2016, [intervenante 1], personne autorisée par la requérante, dans un rapport d’évaluation déposé sous la cote D-2, analyse la situation en lien avec l’implication de la Directrice dans les termes suivants This is a family with two young parents who have had challenges in their teenage years, including drug and alcohol use as well as conjugal violence.

In the past year and a half, the children have gone through a number of changes in their living situation, from moving out of their father’s home, living in Alberta for 3 months, as well as going back and forth between Ms. B and the grandparents’home. While Ms. B has always ensured that the children were well cared for during her absences, it created instability for the children as they did not know when they would see their mother again. Ms. B required reminders and pressure from the caseworker to organize herself with regards to registering the children for school and day-care, and also registering Y’s birth.

The grandparents have played a significant role in helping raise the children. It has been unclear at times who was responsible for bringing the children to medical and dental appointments. As a result, the children were behind in their vaccinations and general check-ups. The grandparents eventually brought the children to these appointments. The DYP’s continued involvement is necessary to support Ms. B as she will be caring for all four of her children as of Septembre 2016, and this will be the first time she will be carrying this resposibility on her own.

All of the children’s security and development remain compromised under

Article 38 B2 of the Youth Protection Act. Both parents verbally agredd to proceed through voluntary measures, however, after many attemps to meet Mr. C to sign the contract, he did not respond to the caseworker. The DYP has therefore decided to seize court. [2] [ 26 ] Le 19 avril 2017, [intervenante 2], personne autorisée par la Directrice, signe un addendum au rapport préalablement déposé faisant état de l’amélioration au niveau des soins octroyés aux enfants de même que de l’implication de la mère et de la volonté des parents à collaborer avec la Directrice.

L’intervenante souligne l’élément suivant : There continues to be challenges in the relationship between Ms.

B and the paternal grandparents, whereas the undersigned needed to intervene to support this dynamic; however, the situation seems to have stabilized recently, but further support is required to ensure this continues. [3] [ 27 ] Ainsi, la requérante reconnait une forme d’amélioration, notamment dans la collaboration et l’ouverture des parents à ce que tout soit mis en œuvre pour corriger la situation. [ 28 ] Ainsi, tenant compte de l’adhésion des parties à la mesure, de l’âge de chacun des enfants, de leurs besoins et de la capacité de la mère à collaborer afin que chacun de ses enfants reçoive tous les soins et services auxquels ils ont droit, le Tribunal conclut que les recommandations de la requérante sont dans l’intérêt de chacun des enfants. [ 29 ] CONSEQUENTLY, THE COURT, [ 30 ] CONCLUDES that these motions are well founded in facts and in law; [ 31 ] GRANTS these motions;

[ 32 ] DECLARES that security and development of children ar considered to be in danger for the reasons that was alleged in each motion; [ 33 ] ENTRUSTS the children to the care of their mother; [ 34 ] ORDERS that frequency and modality of contact between father and the children (Z, A and

X) and with the paternal grandparents be agreed upon among all parties; [ 35 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that father sees Z, A and X once every two weeks (from Friday afternoon until Sunday after supper) at the paternal grandparents’s home, paternal aunt or paternal uncle, and that paternal grandparents, aunt or uncle are presents during contact between the father and the children; [ 36 ] Concerning Y : given the intention of father to resume contact with the child, [ 37 ] ORDERS that frequency and modality of contact between the child and the father be agreed upon among all parties; [ 38 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that father commit himself to meet the social worker before the contact be resumed to be clear about his commitment to the child and his capacity to be consistent whith those contacts; [ 39 ] ORDERS that mother maintains a stable living environment for the children; [ 40 ] ORDERS that the parents ensure that the children not be exposed to any conflict between family members; [ 41 ] ORDERS that the parents ensure that the children’s medical needs are met; [ 42 ] ORDERS that the parents ensure that Z be assessed for his speech and language delay as well as his developmental functioning and follow the recommendations; [ 43 ] ORDERS that father collaborates with the social worker including meeting with the delegate when requested to do so; [ 44 ] RECOMMENDS that father takes the steps to address his personal issues and report back to the DYP as to his progress; [ 45 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the children and the family, including the services of an educators as long as deemed necessary; [ 46 ] THE WHOLE for a period of nine (9) month as of today, meaning until January 26 th , 2018; [ 47 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A who shall then see that the measures are carried out.

SIGNÉ À VILLE A Ce e jour de mai 2017 __________________________________ L’HONORABLE LUCIE GODIN, J.C.Q. Me Sym Davis Procureur de la DPJ Me Alec Ellis Flexer Procureur de l'enfant Me Christophe Lafontant Procureur de la mère Me Gisèle Tremblay Procureure du père Date d’audience : 26 avril 2017 LG/if