2015 QCCQ 11380, 2015 QCCQ 11380

Protection de la jeunesse — 151992 2015 QCCQ 11380 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001848-149 DATE: March 24, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE RENÉE LEMOINE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 2008 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in City A, district A Applicant and A, residing and domiciled in City A, district A Mother and B, residing and domiciled in City A, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ( sections 38 , 75 , 76.1 , 79 and 91 of the Youth Protection Act , R.S.Q. c.

P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act forbids the publishing or broadcasting of information allowing 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 Court is seized of a motion for protection under

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act concerning the situation of the child X, born on […], 2007. [ 2 ] The applicant asks to the Court to declare that the security and development of the child are in danger because the parents neglected their responsibility by leaving the child under the care of an inappropriate babysitter. [ 3 ] The parents were present and respectively represented by Mtre. Michel Grenier, for the mother, and Mtre. Myriam Gaudreault, for the father. Mtre. Joanie Jacob acted on behalf of the child.

The parents admitted most of the allegations in the motion and agreed to the recommendation contained in the social report prepared by [Social Worker 1], the youth protection worker. [ 4 ] The following facts are proven: • On October 9, 2014, the mother left her two (2) children under the care of the grandfather, who passed out. • The grandmother did not know until she heard one of the children crying. • On October 10, 2014, the grandmother brought her two (2) grandchildren to the office of the Director of Youth Protection because she was overwhelmed and could not take care of her grandchildren anymore. • The grandmother was on her way to the women’s shelter in City B. • The mother came to the office on October 14, 2014 and indicated that she would like to get help for her substance use issues. • On October 17, 2014, the grandfather and the mother’s brother were intoxicated in presence of the children.

The parents were not present in the house. • The children were placed in a foster home the same day. • Since October 22, 2014, the parents have not called to know where their children are or met with the social worker. [ 5 ] The evidence presented in the admissions and in the report filed as testimony shows that the security and development of the child are in danger due to the lack of supervision (section 38( b )(1)(iii) of the Youth Protection Act ) and because there is a serious risk that the parents do not provide for the child’s basic needs (

section 38 ( b ) (2) of the Youth Protection Act ). The applicable measures

[ 6 ] The measures proposed are to place the child in a foster home with C for a period of six (6) months in order to provide the child with a safe, nurturing and stable environment. [ 7 ] Both parents must be assessed by the [Program A] worker and follow the recommendations of the assessment, including any treatment programs or psychological follow-up. [ 8 ] The Court is of the opinion that it is in the best interest of the child to grant this motion and give effect to the recommendation contained in the social report.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 9 ] GRANTS this motion; [ 10 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child X, born on […], 2008, are in danger; [ 11 ] ORDERS the placement of the child in a foster home for a period of six (6) months, with a possible reintegration into the home of one of the parents if the situation allows; [ 12 ] ORDERS that contact between the child and his parents be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as to the frequency and terms; [ 13 ] ORDERS both parents to meet with the [Program A] worker and follow his or her recommendations, including a treatment program for addiction or a psychological follow-up; [ 14 ] ORDERS that aid, counselling and assistance be provided to the child and his parents for a period of six (6) months; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the parents remain sober in the presence of the child; [ 16 ] ORDERS the parents to cooperate in the measures ordered by the Court and report regularly to the Director of Youth Protection; [ 17 ] ORDERS the police to cooperate in the execution of these orders, if necessary; [ 18 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of this judgment. __________________________________ RENÉE LEMOINE J.C.Q.

Mtre. Joanie Jacob Counsel for the child Mtre. Gabriel Gaudreault Counsel for the applicant Mtre. Michel Grenier Counsel for the mother Mtre. Myriam Gaudreault Counsel for the father Date of hearing: January 28, 2015