2012 QCCQ 17504, 2012 QCCQ 17504

Protection de la jeunesse — 126771 2012 QCCQ 17504 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] “Youth Division” No: 635-41-000435-112 DATE: July 17, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF THE HONOURABLE LISE GAGNON, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILD: X Born on […], 2011 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., working in Town A(Quebec), district A; Petitioner -and- A, residing and domiciled in Town B (Quebec), district A; Mother -and- B , residing and domiciled at Town C (Quebec), district A; Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) submits to the Court a motion for revision of a decision rendered on December 7, 2011, by Justice Jacques R.

Roy in which the Court entrusted the child to a foster family for a period of six months. The Court also agreed that when the mother would be accepted in a specialized reception center for young mothers and their babies, they would be reunited. [ 2 ] Today, the DYP recommends to the Court that the child be maintained in a foster family for a period of six months with the possibility to be reunited with her mother if the situation allows it. In the next months, the DYP intends to proceed with a family council to find a family member that could provide a life plan for the child.

If so, the DYP informs the Court that he will transfer the child in that new family. [ 3 ] At the hearing, the mother is present and agrees with the recommendations of the DYP. The mother wants to work on her personal issues in order to be able to recover A's responsibility. However, the mother is a realistic young woman. She realises that she has to work on herself before anything.

Meanwhile, she agrees that X be maintained in a foster family for six months and does not want her child to be transferred in another family. [ 4 ] The father is also present and agrees with the recommendations. [ 5 ] As for the child’s attorney, she agrees with the recommendations but insists for X not to be transferred to another foster family, even a member of the extended family, for reasons of stability. Update of the situation since December 7, 2011 [ 6 ] The mother is 16 years old.

She is living in a reception center. [ 7 ] When the mother attended the last Court hearing, she temporarily lived at group A home, in town A. While there, the mother

ran away with A's father. [ 8 ] A few days later, the mother was back in town B reception center, determined to work on her personal issues in order to get X back. [ 9 ] On January 4, 2012, the mother was interviewed at House A to evaluate the possibility for her to integrate their home with A. After 10 minutes, the mother started insulting the social worker [social worker] and pushed her in the face. [ 10 ] The mother was incapable to put aside her anger towards the social worker, even for an hour.

She could not calm down to participate to the interview. [ 11 ] The A House's staff concluded that the mother was not ready. Besides, they felt they were not equipped to deal with the mother's aggressiveness. She would put other mothers and their babies at risk. [ 12 ] A few months later, though little optimistic about the mother’s capacity to be mature enough to integrate House A, their staff said that the door was still open. However, their expectations were clear. The mother was to be highly motivated.

She would have to participate seriously to a follow-up with a psychologist or an art-therapist, and she would have to attend A Program. [ 13 ] As suggested, the mother started a therapy with the psychologist, Aforditi Vahaviolos, which helped her recognize that her own family history had an impact on how she wanted to be with her daughter. The psychologist writes: “X has lived with different members and this appears to have had an impact on her attachment style.

Although she states that she wants her daughter to return in her care, X has sabotaged opportunities provided to her. […] her insight in parenthood is related to her own childhood. X talks about the kind of life that she wants her daughter to have but is unable to talk about how she can provide the kind of lifestyle that she wishes upon her. Discussions are brief as it is clear that she becomes upset with this topic and is unable to regulate emotions that she experiences. Her relationship with her boyfriend is quite volatile marked by aggressive violent outbursts and verbal threats.

This in turn has an impact on X 's psychological and emotional well being.” (pièce D-7, page 1) [ 14 ] The mother also participated to A Program in February 2012. With their help, she began to realise how complicated and demanding it is to take care of a child though she remained determined in succeeding at taking care of A. [ 15 ] Besides the mother's efforts, on March 12, 2012, she was transferred to A reception center for a series of problematic behaviours. She developed a pattern to bully people. She attempted to run away, which ended in physical restraints.

Her aggressive behaviours towards center B's staff (punching, kicking, throwing objects) had become overwhelming for staff. [ 16 ] At center A, three major issues were discussed with the mother. [ 17 ] First, the mother would have to work on her aggressive behaviours towards others. Second, she would have to work on her obsession with the father, which affected her mood and her participation in the program. Third, she would have to focus on her daughter's needs if she wanted to be ready for her one day. [ 18 ] On March 28, 2012, the mother was back to Center B.

Though her relationship with the father remained a disturbing factor for her, the mother kept trying to improve herself. [ 19 ] On May 21, 2012, Center B's staff observed significant improvements. The mother had no more angry outbursts. She had become a positive leader in the group. She was supportive and generous with others. She was opened to share feelings with staff members. [ 20 ] In April 2012, the mother had a contact with her baby while the foster family was down south. The contact went well.

The mother bought cloths for X and made “Kamik”. [ 21 ] Following this positive period, the social worker believed that the mother could possibly integrate House A with her daughter in the next months. [ 22 ] However, since then, the mother's situation deteriorated again. [ 23 ] On June 4, 2012, the mother was informed that the father had a new girlfriend.

The father did not want to be involved with his daughter anymore, neither with the Youth Protection. [ 24 ] On June 5, 2012, the mother arrived to town A, a week before Court date, so she could visit her daughter. [ 25 ] The same day, the social worker went to the foster family with the mother to pick up X for the first visit. Once at the social worker’s office for the visit, the mother called the father. She spoke with him for 15 minutes. After that phone call, the mother became in a hurry to leave. [ 26 ] On the way back to the foster family, the mother asked the social worker a permission to go out.

The social worker answered “no”. The mother reacted in a violent manner. She was angry, doing noise with her mouth. She kept yelling in the car, saying she wanted to be free. [ 27 ] To calm the mother down, the social worker decided to come back on her decision and let the mother go out. The mother was not receptive. She kept yelling and crying. She screamed that her life “was fucked up” and started to want to fight with the social worker.

[ 28 ] The mother started to hit the social worker's seat while holding the baby in her arms. The social worker had to stop the car and told the mother to stop because this was very dangerous. The mother was out of control. [ 29 ] Even after being warned, the mother tried to jump out of the car on three occasions. Eventually police assistance was needed to escort the mother to the group home and protect the child and the social worker. [ 30 ] On June 6, 2012, the mother told the social worker that she wanted to give her daughter to adoption. She said she had been thinking about it for a long time.

She had come to the conclusion that she could not raise her daughter while she was in a group home. The mother also informed the social worker that the father's girlfriend was pregnant. The mother felt hurt. [ 31 ] Following this event, the mother was entrusted to the hospital A to be evaluated by a child psychiatrist.

The psychiatrist decided to let the mother go back to Center B reception center and did his evaluation later in the week. [ 32 ] Because of the mother's decision to give X to adoption, the social worker intends to do a family council to find somebody in the family that could care for X on a long-term basis and maybe adopt her. [ 33 ] X is a ten-month-old baby. [ 34 ] X has already been moved on a few occasions since she is born. [ 35 ] At first, X and her mother lived with Mrs. D that fostered them both. But because of the mother’s uncertain behaviours and her lack of parental skills, Mrs.

D felt overwhelmed and decided not to foster them anymore. [ 36 ] Mrs. E and her spouse Mr. F took over and fostered A. [ 37 ] X changed foster family a few times since then for a few weeks. [ 38 ] In December 2011, the social worker decided to send X back at Mrs.

D house in town A for the mother to be able to spend time with X up north while Mrs E was going down south for the Christmas holidays. [ 39 ] In January 2012, as the mother's integration to House A did not work out, the social worker asked the mother to think about a person in her extended family that could take care of the baby now, but also on a long-term basis as well. The plan was to find a family member that could care for X until the mother would be accepted to House A.

But the plan was also to have a life plan ready for X if ever it would not work out at House A. [ 40 ] The mother suggested her aunt G in town A. [ 41 ] Mrs. G was already a foster home for the DYP but was evaluated again in regards of A's need for a life plan. Mrs. G said she was willing to foster X on a long-term basis if the mother would not be accepted in House A. [ 42 ] On February 16, 2012, X was transferred to Mrs. G house. [ 43 ] Eight days later, Mrs. Gh ad changed her mind.

She said it was too hard to take care of two babies at a time. [ 44 ] She did not seem to have thought about that the week before. [ 45 ] X came back to live with Mrs. E and Mr. F who had no hesitation taking her back. X still lives with them. This foster family is ready to keep her on a long-term basis. [ 46 ] Today, the social worker insists to proceed to a family council to try to identify another family member that could care for X on a long-term basis.

She says by law she has the duty to find somebody in the extended family. [ 47 ] Questioned by the Court on the importance of stability for a child of that age, she admits that this is also a factor that needs to be considered. Analysis and applicable measures [ 48 ] The Court is very empathetic to the mother’s situation. Her life has been difficult and she is still struggling with many personal issues. [ 49 ] Besides her efforts to better control her actions, the mother's behaviour remains unpredictable. Outbursts are still part of her emotional set of reactions.

Her mood often modulates according to the state of her relationship with the father. As at June 2012, it is still the case. [ 50 ] The mother keeps presenting different aggressive behaviours over the months that only long-term therapy will help her solve. [ 51 ] The mother lives in the Center B reception center and she will remain there until December 2012. [ 52 ] The Court appreciates that the mother remains determined to work hard at solving her personal issues. It is very courageous.

The Court knows that the mother is partly motivated by A. [ 53 ] The Court recognizes that the mother showed some efforts in theX last months to try to improve her situation. She participated in therapies. She followed the A program. [ 54 ] However, even highly motivated by her project of being reunited with her daughter and besides some efforts, X was not always

the mother's priority. [ 55 ] The mother remains with a volatile temper, which results in unpredictable outbursts until very recently, and this, in the presence of A. [ 56 ] While the mother still struggles to try to solve her own issues, X is living with Mrs. E and Mr. F. [ 57 ] At the end of this order, X will be 16 months old and will have been living with them for almost a year. [ 58 ] X is presently creating a bond with Mrs. E and Mr. F. They represent her security. They take care of her needs on a daily basis. They provide her with affection. The mother recognizes that X is well taken care of by Mrs.

E and Mr. F. Though she would prefer her daughter to be raised in an A family, the mother agrees that for the next months X stays there.

She thinks her stability will be better served. [ 59 ] The Court appreciates that the mother put A's needs first in deciding that. [ 60 ] Though the Court agrees that an A family member showing interest at a proper time can represent the best interest of a child, A's situation has its unique story and requires its unique solution. [ 61 ] More than anything, X needs stability to be able to build a strong bond to adult figures in order to develop well. [ 62 ] A strong bond is exactly what the mother was deprived of when she was a child.

The mother was moved from one family member to another with the result that the mother is struggling today to have a better life for herself. [ 63 ] X does not have to follow the same path. [ 64 ] Besides, the social worker already tried to find a family member and after only eight days, this family member, evaluated by the DYP, changed her mind. [ 65 ] How many times must a child suffer from moving from home to home in the hope of finding a dedicated family member? [ 66 ] A's transfer to another family would have a serious impact on her attachment process. X is not a pair of Kamik.

X needs to grow some roots to develop well. X is now working at growing these roots with a family that already meets her needs. [ 67 ] Transferring X in any other family, now or later, would seriously jeopardize her development. [ 68 ] The Court believes that a well-informed family council would come to the same conclusion. [ 69 ] If a family council is to be put to contribution, it should be in finding a creative solution for maintaining the A culture alive in A's hearth.

That would contribute to A's best interest. [ 70 ] In the next six months, the Court concludes that it is time to consolidate what X has already developed with Mrs. E and Mr. F.

It is also still time to see if this ultimate effort on the part of the mother to solve her personal issues will give better results than the last six months in order to make herself ready for her daughter. [ 71 ] The next months will be crucial. [ 72 ] Today, the Court has to decide what is in A’s best interest. [ 73 ] The social worker explains that the mother is young and needs time to understand what is a life plan and the procedures. [ 74 ] The Court recognizes that the mother is still a child herself and deserves to be accompanied by a social worker who attends her needs. [ 75 ] But meanwhile somebody has to think of A's needs. [ 76 ] X cannot wait until the mother understands the process to be provided with a solution to ensure her well-being and safe development. [ 77 ] The Court considers that the mother remains an option, but the mother has a long way to go before thinking of recovering A's responsibility.

It is not realistic to think that X will live with her mother in the short term. Not with all the personal issues that the mother still has to work on. [ 78 ] For these reasons, the Court will not allow the reunification of the mother with X in the next six months. This is not to say it is impossible, but it is premature.

Visiting rights according to the evolution of the child and mother's situation will preserve the mother- child relationship while respecting A's needs. [ 79 ] In resorting too quickly to that reunification and without having the insurance that the mother’s problems are solved permanently, there are too many risks to jeopardize A’s security and development. FOR THESES REASONS, THE COURT:

GRANTS PARTLY the petition; REVISES the decision rendered on December 7, 2011 by Justice Jacques R. Roy; ENTRUSTS the child to a foster family, namely Mrs. E and Mr.

F as chosen by the Director of Youth Protection for a period of six (6) months ; ORDERS that the contacts between the child and her parents be determined and supervised by the Director of Youth Protection; ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her family for a period of six (6) months; ORDERS that the parents report at regular intervals, to the Director of Youth Protection, to inform the social worker of their situation; ORDERS that the father receives support to work on his personal issues; ORDERS that the mother receives support to work on her personal issues; ORDERS that the child's parents take an active

part in the application of the measures; ORDERS that the child evolves in a stable environment free of violence, alcohol or neglect; ORDERS that the parents receive support to work on their respective personal issues; ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., who shall see that the measures be carried out; ORDERS the police to collaborate in the execution of this order. __________________________________ Lise Gagnon, J.C.Q. M e Gabriel Gaudreault Attorney for the DYP M e Marie-Claude De Gagné Attorney for the child M e Myriame Gaudreault Attorney for the mother M e Angèle Tommasel Attorney for the father Date of hearing: July 17, 2012