2011 QCCQ 6236, 2011 QCCQ 6236

Protection de la jeunesse — 111384 2011 QCCQ 6236 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 145-41-000368-107 DATE: March 2, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE ROBERT LEVESQUE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1] Petitioner and X Child and A and B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] A petition for protection purpose in respect of X (2010[…]) is referred to the Court by the Director of youth protection pursuant to sections 38 and 75 of the Youth Protection Act. [ 2 ] The petition is based on the following assertions and facts :

a) when X is born the mother was living with her boyfriend C and their two children ;

b) X's mother and the legal father Mr. A said that Mr. A is not the biological father of X and that they made a agreement to put his name on the birth certificate to save some legal fees because they agreed that Mr. A and his wife will take X after birth ;

c) Mr A took X from the hospital after her birth and brought her at his home ;

d) on September 8, 2010, Mr A brought X to her aunt D without her personal belonging and never get in touch with X since then ;

e) X was returned to the care of her biological mother B and she lived with her and Mr C until November 2, 2010 ;

f) on November 2, 2010, X and the 2 other children of B were removed from home and placed for 30 days in a foster family ;

g) Mr C was alone with the 3 children and he was under the influence of alcohol and the social worker was not able to located the mother ;

h) during this 30 days period the mother separated from Mr C ;

i) the mother reorganized herself and after the 30 days she took back her 2 children but said clearly that she does not want X ;

j) X has been living with the foster parents since November 2, 2010 ;

k) the mother refuses parental obligation towards X ;

l) the father has completely abandoned her daughter ;

m) X needs a stable and secure home environment. [ 3 ] At the hearing, the mother is present with her lawyer.

She admits (except one) the allegations of the petition and accepts the recommendations of the Director of youth protection as well as the child's lawyer. [ 4 ] Me Marie-Christine Gagnon, who was representing Mr A whose name is inscribed as the father at the birth certificate, declares to the Court that he is no more interested with the process. [ 5 ] This is the reason why he is not present and why she is not staying for the hearing. [ 6 ] The Court studied the petitioner's psychosocial report and its complement. [ 7 ] Here what the petitioner writes in her complementary report : "Mr A arrived in my office on February 28 2011.

Mr A informed Social Services that he no longer wants the care for X. After much lengthy discussion with spouse, E, they came to the conclusion to put an end of Court proceeding. They no longer have an interest to have X reside with them or obtain custody or visitation rights. Mr A had advised his lawyer regarding putting an end his future involvement with X, despite the outcome of the courts. Mr A is aware that B is requesting that the common-law partner of B (

C) undergo a DNA test to determine his paternity with X. Should in fact be determined that in fact Mr C be the biological father, the situation will remain the same, X be placed under Youth Protection. In conclusion, Mr A does not wish to have any more visitations with X. According to Mr A, the court process may exceed months or a year to determine the finale outcome of X (sic). Mr A believes that it is in the best interest of the child to be kept under Youth Protection Foster care placement and have the court decide with such finale outcome.

Mrs B is not in a position to care for X and she is requesting the courts that the child X be put into foster care, with the hopes that the child will be adopted in a loving family. B is not requesting any visitation rights for X." [ 8 ] Considering the report's content and the position of the mother and the child's lawyer, the Court grants the petition in the sense of the recommendations of the Director of youth protection including an order that a long-term life project be clarified for X. WHEREFORE, THE COURT : [ 9 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of X are considered to be in danger according to

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 10 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted to a foster family designated by the Director of youth protection ; [ 11 ] ORDERS the Director of youth protection to clarify as soon as possible a long-term life project for X ; [ 12 ] ORDERS that the parents' right to exercise their parental authority with regards to the authorizations to be given concerning the routine or urgent health services and the social, academic and extracurricular activities be withdrawn and DELEGATES these rights to the Director of youth protection ; [ 13 ] ORDERS that a person working for an organism or an establishment provides aid, counsel and assistance to X and her family ; [ 14 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of youth protection of the Centre Jeunesse A until February 28, 2012, for the carrying out of the present measures. __________________________________ ROBERT LEVESQUE, J.C.Q.

Me Lynn-Ann Smith, for the petitioner Me Daniel Mill, for the child Me Celestina Almeida, for the mother Mr A, (absent)