2013 QCCQ 11982, 2013 QCCQ 11982

Protection de la jeunesse — 134058 2013 QCCQ 11982 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] Youth Division No. 615-41-001814-135 DATE: May 22, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born […] 1999 [INTERVENANT 1], human relations officer, exercising her profession at A having a place of business at […], in Town A , District A, […] Applicant and D, residing and domiciled at […], in Town B, […] Mother and E, residing and domiciled at […], in Town B, […] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ( sections 38 and 91 , Youth Protection Act , R.S.Q., c.

P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection of A asked that the security and development of X, born […], 1999, be declared in danger. The alleged reasons were serious behavioural disturbances and neglect ( sections 38 ( b ) (1) (iii) and (

f) of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The parents and the youth were present at the hearing. Mtre. Mylène Grondin represented the youth and Mtre. Claude Cossette, the parents. Mtre. Valérie Martel represented the applicant. [ 3 ] Many of the allegations of the Director of Youth Protection were challenged. The evidence showed the following facts. [ 4 ] X has behavioural problems. He consumes drugs, does not attend school regularly, is regularly late in the morning when he attends school and associates with teenagers that identify themselves as the “[crew A]” and also young adults.

He regularly skips classes to be with his friends and refuses to say what they do. [ 5 ] He receives the services of the school psychoeducator, and he was suspended a few times from school because of his numerous absences (141 class periods, which represent 35 days of school). The psychoeducator advised the parents, but they did not cooperate. They are concerned by all the behavioural problems of their youngest son but are unable to correct the situation. [ 6 ] The parents own a restaurant and work long hours. They are unable to provide the appropriate supervision.

They sporadically ask their son to help out at the restaurant. They failed to provide a reliable description of the youth’s situation. [ 7 ] They are aware that he had suicidal thoughts last November. Recently, X made other suicidal threats on Facebook during his provisional placement in a foster family. [ 8 ] The youth does not cooperate. He listens to the rules, but does not respect them. He is very secretive. He does not talk about his friends, his family or his activities. [ 9 ] At school, the authorities noticed that he often approached Secondary I students and talked to them about the “[crew A]”.

Some of his friends came to the school while prohibited from doing so, in order to look for him. He always keeps a locked backpack with him at school. On March 6, the school authorities ordered a body search and they found in his bag three gas bottles and a blue puck, and they found a knife on him hidden in his socks. [ 10 ] Even when the authorities imposed more strict conditions on him for compliance with school rules, he did not respect them. [ 11 ] In the foster family where he stayed from February 22 to March 15, he consumed marijuana twice.

[ 12 ] The youth said on March 14 that there are good reasons to be worried about him and his actions, but he refused to say exactly why. [ 13 ] Since March 15, he has been entrusted in a rehabilitation centre, and he attends school regularly there. His parents visit him when they have time. [ 14 ] The parents could cooperate more, but the Court is convinced that they are really good parents and do their best with their youngest son. They love their son, but it is not easy for them to raise a teen like X who needs constant supervision.

He requires a family with strict discipline and structure in order to deal with such a situation. The parents must live the way that they do because of their working schedule. [ 15 ] Consequently, the Court declares that the security and development of X are in danger due to a lack of care and guidance to ensure his school attendance, and due to his behavioural problems.

X requires very special attention, supervision and structure. [ 16 ] Now the Court must determine the most appropriate measures that would put an end to the situation and be in X’s best interest. [ 17 ] The Director of Youth Protection asked for placement of the youth in a reception centre for nine months. The youth and his parents disagreed with the duration; they would accept placement for three months. [ 18 ] The evidence reveals that the youth needs to develop insight, autonomy and a sense of responsibility. He must accept authority and learn to comply with the rules.

He must develop his communication with his parents and not be easily influenced by his friends. [ 19 ] Because of the parents’ long working hours, they completely lost track with their son and they cannot transfer their parental responsibilities to their oldest children. They must adjust and adapt their way of life so as to provide their son with structure and supervise him. [ 20 ] The youth needs to develop his trust of adults, and accept and respect authority. He needs rehabilitation services to optimize his development.

He must also stop consuming drugs. [ 21 ] The placement’s duration depends of the youth’s motivation and determination to avail himself of all the services he will be offered. Given the youth’s progress up to now and the seriousness of his problems, placement for a minimum of nine months is required. [ 22 ] For the parents, such a period of time should be sufficient to modify their way of life and develop good communication with their son.

They will have to meet regularly with the social worker and cooperate closely in the measures set up for X [ 23 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 24 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are in danger; [ 25 ] ORDERS the placement of X in a reception centre for a period of nine months; [ 26 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counselling and assistance to the youth and his parents for a period of one year; [ 27 ] ORDERS the parents and the youth to actively cooperate with the social worker; [ 28 ] ORDERS the youth to undergo a drug addiction assessment and follow-up as required, for the time period set by the therapist; [ 29 ] PROHIBITS X from communicating directly or indirectly with Y, Z, A, B and C; [ 30 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to supervise the youth’s visits and access to his parents; [ 31 ] ORDERS any police officer to cooperate in the execution of the present judgment; [ 32 ] ENTRUSTS the youth’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing this judgment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Mtre. Valérie Martel, attorney for the applicant Mtre. Claude Cossette, attorney for the parents Mtre. Mylène Grondin, attorney for the youth Date of hearing: April 4, 2013