2014 QCCQ 15810, 2014 QCCQ 15810

Protection de la jeunesse — 143842 2014 QCCQ 15810 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000641-142 610-41-000642-140 DATE: August 4, 2014 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2007 Y , born on [...], 2007 [Social Worker 1] , Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection exercising her profession at the Centre Jeunesse A, having a place of business at […] in Town A, district A (Quebec) […] Applicant and A , residing and domiciled at […] in Town B, district B (Quebec) […] Mother and B , residing and domiciled at […] in Town C, district A (Quebec) […] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 applicant asks the Court to declare the security or development of X and Y , both born on [...], 2007 endangered pursuant to sections 38 b) 1° (iii) and 2° of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] If the Court declares that the children's situation is compromised the applicant recommends as applicable measures that Y be entrusted to her aunt and X to his mother. At the beginning of the hearing those recommendations are for twelve months (

Y) and eighteen months (X). During the hearing the applicant agrees that a length of six months for each child is appropriate. [ 3 ] The mother is present and not represented by a lawyer. She doesn't wish to be represented even if the Court has explained to her, her rights in this regard. [ 4 ] The father is present and represented by a lawyer. He admits that the security or development of his children is compromised pursuant to the law and agrees with the measures recommended by the Director of Youth Protection but for a length of six months only. [ 5 ] The children are absent but represented by a lawyer.

There is no admission concerning the children's safety but there is an agreement as for the measures recommended by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 6 ] The Court considers the following facts as proven by preponderant evidence. The facts [ 7 ] The children and their family have been known from the Youth Protection services for several years. [ 8 ] The family was followed under the Youth Protection Act from March 2008 until October 2012 for substance abuse by both parents, their instability and also for inappropriate educational context in the parental environment.

Throughout the measures applied under the law the mother has remained the main caregiver to the children. The father's presence to his children was irregular. [ 9 ] Because the parents encountered difficulties to exercise their parental skills and had conflicts between them, the children have been the object of several judgments from the Court of Quebec. [ 10 ] The mother has the legal custody of the children. Y and X are twins of six years old. [ 11 ] On May 16, 2014 the Court postpones the hearing until July 9.

Both children are entrusted to their aunt. [ 12 ] The father has prior convictions for different types of offences. Last November he was arrested for threats, possession of drugs

and breach of probation. [ 13 ] In July 2013, a party was held at the father's residence who was living at a friend's house. In the morning a fight occurred between the father and a man. The father was pepper sprayed by the other man during the fight. The children were present at that time. [ 14 ] Then the children were brought at the Centre Jeunesse's office by the police officers. X received some pepper spray in one eye when he left the house. [ 15 ] The father is known by the police officers to have suspicious lifestyle.

The father's residence is known to hold parties and there would often be visitors coming and going. [ 16 ] After the July event the mother did not allow the father to have access to his children. X visited his father for Christmas and then he started visiting him more regularly in February 2014. It lasts a few weeks before the mother decided he would not have contacts with his father anymore. [ 17 ] Even though the mother has custody of the children she entrusted them to her mother in August 2013. At that time the mother's apartment was unsuitable for the children.

The grandmother offered to take the children until the mother would get another apartment. The children went back with the mother on October 2013. [ 18 ] When the children were living with the mother Y mentioned that her mother did not always wake up with them in the morning and that they had an alarm clock set for them. Y was seen at school without having being taken care of in the morning (hair not brushed).

When confronted by the Youth Protection worker the mother explained that she did not want to baby her children and that they were able to wake up and have their breakfast by themselves. [ 19 ] At the hearing the mother denies the fact that she did not wake up with her children in the morning. [ 20 ] As for the mother's criminal record she has four criminal convictions. • The children • X [ 21 ] He is six years old. [ 22 ] During the first year of their life X and Y were entrusted to their maternal grandmother for a few months and were also entrusted to two different foster families.

Since then the mother has been their main caregiver and was stable long enough to allow the Centre Jeunesse to close the file in October 2012. [ 23 ] The relationship between the parents had its ups and downs. The child witnessed some episode of conjugal violence between the two of them. [ 24 ] He is in grade one in school. He is described as being a solid reader and a bright child. However he has some behaviour problems that need to be addressed. He has tantrums at school as well as at home.

It is difficult to explain why he reacts like that because he does not seem to have a regular pattern. [ 25 ] He was suspended from school in December 2013 for hitting a school staff member. The school tries to get services for him but so far no significant improvement has been observed. The mother had taken a medical appointment with a paediatrician for him to be evaluated but did not attend it because the child had a flu. Another appointment has to be rescheduled. [ 26 ] The mother has more and more difficulties to react to the child's behaviour. She tries to discipline him without being successful.

She said that the child makes such a fit that she is scared that it could result in her being kicked out of her apartment. She asked more than once that someone takes over with the child because she is overwhelmed by his behaviours. [ 27 ] The child receives services from the First Line services on the community. The follow-up started in the fall 2013. However no major improvement has been noted concerning the child's behaviour. [ 28 ] As for the child's behaviour the father does not believe he has to see a paediatrician.

He says things are fine when the child is with him. [ 29 ] The contacts between the children and their father have been irregular and unpredictable. The day the parents sat down with the Youth Protection worker to set up the measures the mother did not want the children to see their father.

Nevertheless X had a major fit the following day and then the mother wanted the father to take over. [ 30 ] Even though the father mentioned having a verbal agreement with the mother as for having regular visits with the children he was almost two weeks without seeing them. [ 31 ] At the end of April the mother called the social emergency hot line because she could not handle X anymore. A mother's aunt agreed to keep him for a few days. However the mother contacted the Youth Protection worker in order to place X. [ 32 ] The Youth Protection worker asked the father and he agreed to take him.

He mentioned that the mother never called him to let him know things were not doing well with X. [ 33 ] The discipline at the father's residence is not an issue. The father does not have to intervene with the child as the mother has to.

[ 34 ] On May 16, 2014 the Court entrusted X and Y as provisional measures to their aunt Mrs C. The child reacted at first at his aunt's place. He has made improvement with dealing with his tantrums. Despite these improvements the aunt mentioned she could not keep the child furthermore. It is getting too much for her and it is difficult to find babysitters for the child. [ 35 ] Following the provisional measures the mother had approximately one visit per week. As for the father he was absent at the Court hearing.

The Director of Youth Protection informed him about the measures and told him to contact the Youth Protection services if he wanted contacts with his children. The father did not contact the Director of Youth Protection and it was difficult to meet with him. • Y [ 36 ] Y is six years old. She is in good health. She is currently in grade one and described as being a bright student. She is affected by her brother's behaviours. While he was suspended from school she seemed happier. [ 37 ] Y lived with her maternal grandmother from August to October 2013.

She went back with her mother and then she asked to live with her grandmother again from November to the end of December 2013. [ 38 ] As for X, Y's access to her father has been very irregular. [ 39 ] On May 16, 2014 as for X, Y was entrusted to her aunt. She is happy where she is and she would like to remain at «A» School in Town C for the year to come. [ 40 ] According to her aunt Y is an easy child. She agrees to keep her for the duration of the measures. • The parents [ 41 ] Both parents have a positive bond with their children. [ 42 ] The mother intends to move to Town D.

She has an apartment over there and it will be available on August 1 st . Her plan is to remain in that region for the next few years until the children would reach high school. Her father lives there also. He is a good support for her. [ 43 ] The mother thinks it would be good for X to start over. She is going to focus on the child and on her fiancé who studies in mining. [ 44 ] The mother states that she does not have any contact with the father. It is better for the children and for themselves. [ 45 ] As for the father he is also seeking a place for himself.

The house where he was living in was cut of electricity in May 2014. He is planning on fixing the bill of electricity or finding another place. Analysis and decision [ 46 ] The parents acknowledge that the security or development of their children is compromised pursuant to the law. They agree with the applicant's recommendations.

As for the measures the children also agree with her recommendations. [ 47 ] The evidence is preponderant that the parents have to focus on their children needs and also on their own stability. [ 48 ] Those children need a stable place to live as they were moved several times from one place to another's. [ 49 ] According to the applicant entrusting X to his mother is a better solution than a foster home. Considering the child's behavioural problems a placement in a foster home would worsen his situation because he could be rejected. [ 50 ] The mother and the child could receive help in Town D.

The child's school will also be advised of the child's situation. The mother's collaboration with the Director of Youth Protection is good. [ 51 ] As for Y she is happy at her aunt's place.

Her aunt wishes to keep her with her. [ 52 ] As for the father he will have to find a stable place for himself before considering any contacts with the children. [ 53 ] Considering the evidence as a whole the Court concludes that the security or development of X and Y, born on [...], 2007 is endangered pursuant to sections 38 b) 1° (iii) and 2° of the Youth Protection Act . [ 54 ] As for the measures the applicant's recommendations are appropriate, reasonable and in the children's best interest.

For these reasons the Court: [ 55 ] Grants the motion; [ 56 ] Declares that the security or development of X and Y born on [...], 2007 is endangered pursuant to sections 38 b) 1° (iii) and 2° of the Youth Protection Act; [ 57 ] Orders the following measures for a period of six months; for Y [ 58 ] Entrusts Y to her aunt Mrs C;

[ 59 ] Orders that the contacts between Y and her parents be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for the modalities, the frequency and the length; [ 60 ] Orders that following the placement that Y be entrusted to the parent that will be the more appropriate to answer her needs; for X [ 61 ] Entrusts X to his mother; [ 62 ] Orders that the contacts between X and his father be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for the modalities, the frequency and the length; for both children [ 63 ] Recommends that there be some contacts between the children as often as possible ; [ 64 ] orders that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures; [ 65 ] Takes judicial notice of the consent of the mother and orders that the mother be evaluated for possible mental health issues and to participate in any treatments or follow-up judged necessary by the professional as long as decided by this professional; [ 66 ] Takes judicial notice of the consent of the mother to participate in a parenting skills program and orders the mother to participate in such program; [ 67 ] Orders the father to remain sober in the presence of the children and make sure that the children are not in the presence of people under the influence of drug or alcohol; [ 68 ] Orders that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counselling and assistance to the children, the parents and Mrs C; [ 69 ] Orders that the parents report on a regular basis to the Director of Youth Protection to inform him of the current situation; [ 70 ] Orders that the children receive the health care required by their situation; [ 71 ] Orders that all professionals be permitted to exchange relevant information regarding the children's and the parents' situation; [ 72 ] Orders any police body to collaborate for the purpose of executing this enactment; [ 73 ] Entrusts the children's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing the measures ordered by the Court. __________________________________ Josée Bélanger, J.C.Q.

Me Julie Lemire, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Peggy Warolin, attorney for the children Me Sébastien Lebel, attorney for the father Date of hearing: July 9, 2014