2021 QCCQ 17263, 2021 QCCQ 17263

Protection de la jeunesse — 214664 2021 QCCQ 17263 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-002325-196 DATE: May 28, 2021 (written judgment rendered on July 6, 2021) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2016 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] & [SOCIAL WORKER 2], Youth Protection workers, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...] Applicants and B, residing and domiciled at [...] Mother and C , residing and domiciled at [...] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 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 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) asks the Court to prolong a decision rendered on October 21, 2020, regarding the child X, born on [...], 2016.

At that date the Court declared the security and development still endangered and entrusted the child to her parents with services, until April 30, 2021. [ 2 ] The DYP asks that the child remain with the parents with aid, counselling and assistance until October 20, 2021. [ 3 ] X has 3 siblings, Y (3 years), Z (6 years) and A (12 months). The Court is also seized with their situation. Position of the Parties [ 4 ] The mother is absent, but represented by Me Angèle Tommasel.

She recognizes that the security and development of her child are still endangered and she agrees with the measures. [ 5 ] The father is absent and not represented. Despite being well aware of the application, he did not come at the Court. Considering the valuable notification, the interest of the child and the consent of the parties, the Court proceed in his absence. [ 6 ] The child is absent, but represented by Me Geneviève Lucas. On her client’s behalf, she submits that her situation is still endangered and that the measures suggested being in her best interest.

History of the Situation [ 7 ] On October 10, 2019 , the Court was seized with an application for protection. X was 3 years old. The family was known since 2017. The child was in a foster family since August 2019, and the parents did not show interest to see them. The parents had conjugal violence issues. The mother did not have alcohol consumption issues, but the father drank sometimes. The mother was also physically aggressive towards her 2 daughters. The mother accepted to be followed by the Social Services on a weekly basis to learn to deal with stressful situations.

The Court declared that the security and development of the children were endangered [1] and entrusted the child to a foster family with reintegration with the parents as soon as the situation allows it, the whole until October 30, 2020. [ 8 ] On October 21, 2020 , the Court revised the situation. The parents improve their situation, and the child was reintegrated in May 2020. The father still had alcohol consumption issues. In September 2020, while the father was intoxicated, and taking care of the children, the oldest one, Z, was sexually abused by the maternal aunt’s boyfriend, Mr. D.

The Court maintained the child under her parents’ care, prohibited contact between the children and the maternal aunt’s boyfriend, the whole until April 30, 2021. Facts

[ 9 ] Since the last order, the child remained with her parents. [ 10 ] Z speaks [language A] and English. She has very good social skills. As being the oldest, she is the one who was the most impacted by her parents’ situation. [ 11 ] X attends day care on a daily basis. She is a young shy and quiet girl, but she has positive social skills. [ 12 ] Y is very active and joyful.

He has a very good development, and he is very sociable. [ 13 ] A has a very good development and very strong bonds with her parents who take care of her very well. [ 14 ] The father found a new job at [Company A], and he has to be there 3 weeks out of 6. During his absence the mother takes care of the children alone. [ 15 ] Since the reintegration in May, the DYP worker notes that the parents made very great improvements regarding their educational methods and also regarding the hygiene.

Indeed, while this aspect was problematic before, for now, the children are always clean and well dressed. [ 16 ] On March 28, 2021, a new report was received regarding an event of physical abuse of Z by the part of the mother. After investigation, the DYP concludes that nothing wrong happened and closed this evaluation. [ 17 ] The children are very attached to their parents and never showed being scared of them.

This convinced the DYP that no traumatizing situation occurred and that the children feel safe with their parents. [ 18 ] The mother is currently pregnant with her fifth child. [ 19 ] With time, the mother’s collaboration drastically improved.

She was very reluctant at the beginning, but today she is able to recognize the positive aspect of this intervention and she implemented the tools provided to her for the best interest of her children. [ 20 ] The father also stopped drinking and he was able to maintain his sobriety. [ 21 ] The DYP was thinking about closing the file, but the recent evaluation made her think that the old pattern would have resurfaced.

The evaluation was finished during the week of the Court hearing, and for the best interest of the children, the DYP recommend that the measures be prolonged for another 6 months. [ 22 ] The mother agrees with this measure, and the Court also concurs. Indeed, with the arrival of the new born and the stress it could bring to the mother, it is in the best interest of the children that the family be well surrounded and the positive changed be strongly rooted.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 23 ] GRANTS the application; [ 24 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2016, are still endangered; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the child remain with the parents; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the parents periodically report to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in their child’s regard to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the child are endangered; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the child not come into contact with certain people designated by the Court, namely D; [ 29 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the family; [ 30 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X , to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 31 ] THE WHOLE until October 31, 2021. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q. Me Adèle Cyr, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Geneviève Lucas, attorney for the child Me Angèle Tommasel, attorney for the mother

Date of hearing: May 28, 2021