2011 QCCQ 18400, 2011 QCCQ 18400

Protection de la jeunesse — 117291 2011 QCCQ 18400 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001192-092 DATE: December 2, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [Social Worker 1], Youth Protection Worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in City A.

APPLICANT and X, born on […], 1999 TEENAGER and A MOTHER AND B FATHER ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The applicant in this case is asking for the decision rendered by Honourable Justice Lise Gagnon, J.C.Q. on April 19, 2011 to be reviewed, considering that certain events call for the intervention of the Court. [ 2 ] Although all the parties had been duly informed, only the mother attended the hearing in ville A on November 8, 2011. [ 3 ] The father, presently incarcerated, was absent and had not retained counsel to represent him. [ 4 ] As to X, on the date where the motion was presented, he came to the Court, met with a counsel but would have refused to give him the mandate to represent him.

When the case was called, he had simply left the premises without voicing his intentions. [ 5 ] From the documents on file and the evidence heard, the Court notes the following. [ 6 ] The previous judgment, besides maintaining that the child’s situation was endangered, entrusted him to the care of C and D until majority. [ 7 ] Shortly after the decision, the teenager started to show serious behaviour problems. [ 8 ] He would have committed a significant number of criminal offences such as thefts, mischiefs, and breaking and entering. [ 9 ] In addition, he has become a regular user of marihuana and would have sniffed gasoline on a few occasions, which caused him to be hospitalized last August 28. [ 10 ] Although the foster parents do not wish to end the previously ordered placement, they are not able to cope with the current behaviour of the youth. [ 11 ] However, as soon as his behaviour improves, they are willing to take him back. [ 12 ] The mother wishes but the best for her son and, in the circumstances, she sees fit the measure sought by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 13 ] In this respect, the report prepared by Ms. [social worker1] suggests a foster placement for a period of six months.

However, at the hearing, she specifies that, considering the resources available, it would be preferable that the youth be placed in a rehabilitation centre.

[ 14 ] She explains this change in her recommendation as resulting from a change in the location that had been contemplated, that could be qualified as a “specialized foster home”, which has now gained the status of a rehabilitation centre. [ 15 ] Consequently, the applicant recommends a placement in a rehabilitation centre intended for a clientele similar in age to that of X. [ 16 ] The evidence shows without a doubt that the teenager adopts inadequate behaviours that will likely cause him serious prejudice. [ 17 ] Then it appears necessary to intervene to prevent any further deterioration. [ 18 ] Considering the seriousness and the type of gestures committed by the young man, the applicant’s suggestion seems appropriate. [ 19 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 21 ] REVIEWS the decision rendered on April 19, 2011; [ 22 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the teenager are still endangered; [ 23 ] ORDERS the placement in a reception center for a maximum period of six months with gradual reintegration in the previous foster family, if the situation allows; [ 24 ] DECLARES that, after this period, the placement ordered by judgment on April 19, 2011 resume; [ 25 ] DECLARES that all the measures ordered in the judgment rendered on April 19, 2011 remain in force if not obsolete. __________________________________ JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS, J.C.Q.

Me Stéphanie Lachance Cain Lamarre Casgrain Wells Lawyers for the applicant Me Sarah Plamondon Lawyer for the mother Date of hearing: November 8, 2011