2016 QCCQ 9814, 2016 QCCQ 9814

Protection de la jeunesse — 164237 2016 QCCQ 9814 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001936-159 640-41-001937-157 640-41-001938-155 DATE: July 4 th , 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF : X , born on […], 2005 Y , born on […], 2012 Z , born on […], 2009 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of youth protection of the A C.Y.P.C., working in City A, District A Applicant and A, residing and domiciled in City A, District A Mother and B, presently detained at the Detention Center in St-Jérôme, District of Terrebonne Father of Y and Z and interested party in the file of X ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (

section 95 of the Youth Protection Act , R.S.Q. c. P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ JL2340 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 Court is seized with motions for revision of the judgments rendered by Judge Jean Gravel, J.C.Q., on November 12 th , 2015, concerning Y, born on […], 2012, Z, born on […], 2009 and X, born on […], 2005.

The applicant, Mrs [Social Worker 1], asks for the prolongation of the measures ordered until May 31 st , 2017. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the mother is present with her lawyer, Me Angela Tommasel, Me Marie-Claude DeGranpré represents the children and Me Donald Bourget the applicant. [ 3 ] The mother admits all the allegations and agrees with the measures. X also agrees with the measures and he admits one allegation. [ 4 ] It was previously ordered that X receive a psychological assessment as soon as possible and all the services required by his special health conditions.

Also, the parents were ordered to remain sober in presence of their children and without any violence behaviour. [ 5 ] Now it is proved that the father’s situation remains the same as he is detained. The mother continues to take care alone of her three sons. The children X and Z have been recently suspended from school. X has serious health issues as he suffers from nephrotic syndrome. The mother is able to impose limits to the children and offers good collaboration with the social worker.

[ 6 ] Unfortunately, the psychological assessment of X is not done yet. Recently the mother refused to sign the authorization regarding such evaluation. [ 7 ] Again, it must be explained to her the necessity to have such assessment as it was previously ordered by the Court. It is urgent that such evaluation be completed. As he is aggressive and impulsive, such evaluation may identify specific needs of the child. [ 8 ] Z also needs to be evaluated by a psychiatrist. Those three children are vulnerable.

Even if the mother collaborates well with the services, she might easily get overwhelmed by the children’s situation. She needs support and would beneficiate of the services of an educator to increase her parental capacities.

CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE, THE COURT: [ 9 ] GRANTS the motions; [ 10 ] DECLARES that the security and development of Y, born on […] 2012, Z , born on […], 2009 and X, born on […], 2005, are still endangered; [ 11 ] REMAINS the children with the mother; [ 12 ] ORDERS the mother to report periodically to the social worker on the measures she applies on her own regard or on the children’s regard to put an end to the compromission; [ 13 ] ORDERS that X receive a psychological assessment as son as possible; [ 14 ] ORDERS that X receive all services adjusted to his special health condition; [ 15 ] ORDERS the father to seek help for his personal issues; [ 16 ] ORDERS the parents to remain sober in presence of their children and without violence behaviour; [ 17 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the children and the father be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for frequency, modalities and degree of supervision; [ 18 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the children and the parents for one year; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the child Z be evaluated by a psychiatrist and that he receives a follow-up if required; [ 20 ] RECOMMANDS to the Director of Youth Protection to provide the services of an educator to the children and the mother; [ 21 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children to the Director of Youth Protection of A C.Y.P.C. for the purpose of executing the measures ordered by the Court. __________________________________ Denyse Leduc, J.C.Q.

Me Marie-Claude DeGagné For the children Me Donald Bourget For the applicant Me Angela Tommasel For the mother Date of hearing: May 25, 2016