2012 QCCQ 19065, 2012 QCCQ 19065

Protection de la jeunesse — 128181 2012 QCCQ 19065 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division NO: 615-41-001742-120 DATE: November 29, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE LUCILLE CHABOT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection Worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre Jeunesse A PETITIONER AND X Born on […], 2011 CHILD AND A MOTHER AND B FATHER ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ( Sections 38 and 91 of the Youth Protection Act , R.S.Q., c.

P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection of the Centre Jeunesse A submits a motion asking the Court to declare that the security and the development of X, eighteen months old, are endangered pursuant to

section 38 paragraphs b) 1) iii) (failure to provide a child with the appropriate supervision or support, b) (risk of neglect) and c) (psychological ill-treatment) of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] Despite the fact that the hearing was held in French, the present judgment is rendered in English because the Court believes that it is in the best interest of the child since it will facilitate the transfer of the file to Director of Youth Protection of the A Board of Health and Social Services of A.

Both parents are currently living in City A therefore measures are going to be taken for the file to be transferred there. [ 3 ] At the hearing, M e Claude Cossette acts on behalf of the mother and M e Sylvie Gourd on behalf of the father. M e Mylène Grondin represents the interest of the young child. M e Annie Gaouette represents the applicant. [ 4 ] Most of the allegations of the motion are admitted by both parents.

They agree that the security and the development of X are endangered and they also agree with the measures recommended by the Social Worker. [ 5 ] The parents have been in a relationship for three years. Their conjugal life is punctuated with break-ups and reconciliations. Each time, the mother moves from City A to City B. When the relationship resumes, she moves back to City A. [ 6 ] The parents have had many arguments where they mutually accused one another of all kinds of things, especially because one or the other resents events that happened in the past.

So, it seems that it is difficult for the parents to live together and impossible for them to live apart. [ 7 ] In August 2011, the parents reached an agreement on voluntary measures with the Director of Youth protection. They admitted their unstable and conflictual relationship. After one year of services, the situation remains the same. At the hearing both parents told the Court that they were engaged and decided to settle their conjugal problems.

They both enrolled in a therapy that is supposed to start on November 18 to improve their communication and stabilize their relationship. [ 8 ] During the last year, the mother spent a few months at center A with her child. She put an end to her therapy two week before it ended. Recently she tried to go back to center A, but was denied this possibility. Between February and September, she was able to remain sober. In September, she relapsed during a weekend, consuming drugs and alcohol. She still consumes alcohol a few times a week.

She recognizes that this consumption puts her at risk of resuming her excessive consumption. She would like to go back in a treatment centre in City B. [ 9 ] As for the father, he chose a therapy centre in City C in order to work on his addiction issues and anger management.

[ 10 ] Both parents would like to have X transferred in a foster family in City A as soon as possible. This transfer was not done before because of the instability of the mother. [ 11 ] The father is currently living with his daughter, born from a previous relationship. It seems that he is doing well with her. [ 12 ] The mother has seven other children who were placed with extended family until their majority or adopted. The situation with X is different.

As the mother spent an extended period at center A with her daughter, there is a strong bond between them. [ 13 ] There is no doubt that both parents deeply love X and would like to change their lifestyle in order to have her reintegrated with them. [ 14 ] The parents will have to fully collaborate with all the services that are going to be put in place. [ 15 ] For these reasons, the Court: [ 16 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of X, born on […], 2011, are endangered pursuant to

section 38 paragraphs b) 1) iii) (failure to provide a child with the appropriate supervision or support, b) (risk of neglect) and c) (psychological ill-treatment) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the child be placed in a foster family for a period of six months including a progressive reintegration with her parents if the situation allows to do so; [ 19 ] TAKES NOTICE that the mother and the father consent to participate to a therapy in CITY D and ORDERS both parents to participate, collaborate and follow through with the entire therapy; [ 20 ] TAKES NOTICE that the mother consents to participate in a therapy for her drug and alcohol related problems and ORDERS the mother to participate, collaborate and to complete the entire therapy; [ 21 ] TAKES NOTICE that the father consents to participate in a therapy for his addiction problems and anger management and ORDERS the father to participate, collaborate and to complete the entire therapy; [ 22 ] RECOMMENDS that the administrative steps be taken as soon as possible by the Director of Youth Protection to transfer the file to City A and that the child be transferred as soon as the situation of the parents will allow to do so; [ 23 ] ORDERS that visitation rights between the child and her parents be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 24 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of the execution of the court orders. __________________________________ LUCILLE CHABOT, J.Q.C.

M e Annie Gaouette Lawyer for the petitioner M e Claude Cossette Lawyer for the mother M e Sylvie Gourd Lawyer for the father M e Mylène Grondin Lawyer for the child Date of hearing: November 1, 2012