2021 QCCQ 12572, 2021 QCCQ 12572

Protection de la jeunesse — 214059 2021 QCCQ 12572 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] Youth Division No: 760-41-006459-203 760-41-006460-201 DATE: February 19, 2021 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X , born on […], 2019 Y , born on […], 2019 Children ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION A Applicant v.

A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 seeks a 9 month protection order in reason of the children’s exposure to a conflictual family dynamic. [ 2 ] In consigning their positions, the parents recognize the situation of endangerment and consent to the proposed orientation. Acting in virtue of her legal mandate, the attorney for the children also subscribes to the conclusions. [ 3 ] The Court grants the application and the following elements justify its decision.

Analysis and decision [ 4 ] Since August 2020, the Director intervenes in the children’s situation in relation to the psychological ill-treatment brought on from their parent’s volatile relationship. [ 5 ] Initially, the children reside with both their parents. [ 6 ] The children witness tensions and repeated altercations between their parents. During moments of anger, the father can act impulsively (throwing things, damaging property). [ 7 ] The parents seek services during their relationship to resolve their issues, to little avail.

Separations and reconciliations are cyclical. [ 8 ] The parents cooperate with the evaluation process. They recognize the impacts of the situation on their children, even describing their relationship as toxic. [ 9 ] Although they agree to participate in services to ease the tensions of the family dynamic, this process is mostly paralyzed by the mistrust and mutual blame which defines their parental relationship. [ 10 ] The situation continues to deteriorate and conflicts are recurrent. The parents separate and ensues a particularly intense period during which the father is extremely reactive.

He is diagnosed with anxiety and depression. [ 11 ] Results that the father now faces charges in relation to allegations of criminal harassment, driving dangerously, theft and mischief. Contacts are prohibited with the mother. [ 12 ] An interim Superior Court judgment grants custody to the mother while providing supervised access to the father.

[ 13 ] The Director assumes the supervision of the children’s visits with their father and these evolve positively. [ 14 ] The father demonstrates good parenting skills and the children interact well with him. The visitation will soon progress from their offices to the father’s home in order to further normalize the situation. [ 15 ] On a personal level, he continues his follow-ups and takes his medications. He completes an anger management program. [ 16 ] The mother shows some resistance to the father’s role.

She denies being controlling, stating that her actions stem from her concerns as to the father’s well-being. The father has similar negative perceptions as concerns the mother. [ 17 ] Co-parenting remains a challenge as the parental relationship remains strained and negative perceptions are still in place. [ 18 ] All these issues contribute to the children being put at risk, requiring that measures be put in place to protect them and rehabilitate the family dynamic. [ 19 ] In view of the evidence and the children’s best interests, the Court endorses the conclusions sought.

FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the applications for protection; [ 21 ] DECLARES the security and the development of the children in danger for the following reason : • Psychological ill-treatment (article 38c) Youth Protection Act ) [ 22 ] ENTRUSTS the children to their mother; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the children and their father be following agreement between the parties and in the presence of a third party chosen by the Director; [ 24 ] AUTHORIZES the partial or complete lifting of the supervision following agreement between the parties; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the parents report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or their children’s regard to put an end at the situation in which the security or development of the children are in danger; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 27 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the children and their family; [ 28 ] THE WHOLE for 9 months; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the present judgment. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Audrey-Anne Monière Attorney for the Applicant Me Pamela O’Reilly Attorney for the mother Me Rebecca Etingin Attorney for the father Me Stéphanie Castagnier Attorney for the children Date of hearing: February 19, 2021 Date of signature: April 8, 2021