2011 QCCQ 6516, 2011 QCCQ 6516

Protection de la jeunesse — 111514 2011 QCCQ 6516 CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC [...] JJ0296 COURT OF QUEBEC YOUTH DIVISION N°: 525-41-024385-114 DATE: April 29, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE ANN-MARIE JONES, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ In the case of: X Born on […], 2002 ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGEMENT

Section 38 Y.P.A. ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: Within the framework of the Youth Protection Act , no person may publish or broadcast information allowing a child or the child’s parents to be identified. Any person who contravenes this provision is liable to a fine. [Y.P.A. sections 11.2.1 and 135] [ 1 ] The Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of […], 2011, in accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the law. [ 2 ] The Court was presented with a motion by the Director of Youth Protection to have the security and development of the child declared compromised under

section 38, paragraph b) 1) ii) and iii) of the Youth Protection Act, as there the mother does not meet the child's basic needs. [ 3 ] The principal facts alleged in support of the motion are the following: • The child resides with the mother, and the mother’s boyfriend A, regularly visits; • The child’s biological father is involved with the family to the extent that under an informal agreement, he maintains phone contact with the child every two months and visits every summer; • In 2002, the Children’s Aid Society of province A was involved with the child and the family; • On May 11, 2010, the family was signalled to the Director of Youth Protection given concerns with the child’s physical health including lice in her hair, warts on her hands and absence of dental follow-up in addition to concerns with her school attendance; • The mother does not meet the child’s basic needs: . the child’s dental condition is deteriorating; . the child’s last dental consultation was in June 2008 under emergency circumstances; . the mother alleged the loss of the child’s Medicare card which was only renewed in January 2011; . the child was taken to a dentist in February 2011 after numerous requests by the youth protection delegate; • The child is exposed to the physical and verbal violence between the mother and Mr.

A; • The mother and Mr. A consume alcohol as well as marijuana in the presence of the child;

• The mother denies any drug use; • On March 22, 2011, the delegate was refused entry to the home by Mr. A; • The child disclosed that she frequently witnesses physical and verbal violence between her mother and Mr. A and that lately, Mr.

A threw the mother’s phone on the floor and that it broke; • The mother fails to follow-up with appointments with the youth protection delegate and to inform the latter of many change of address and phone number. [ 4 ] The Director of Youth Protection recommends that the child be entrusted to her mother’s care with a social follow-up for a period of nine months. [ 5 ] The mother admits the majority of the facts alleged in the motion and agrees with the recommended measures. The mother says that the child has seen a dentist and has one more appointment. X has also seen an optometrist and she needs eyeglasses.

The mother says that Mr. A often comes to her home, but that he does not live with her. She states that she does not feel the need for a therapeutic follow-up, as she doesn’t consider that her relationship with Mr. A is abusive. [ 6 ] Counsel for the child agrees with the recommended measures. [ 7 ] The Court also heard the testimony of [social worker 1], youth protection delegate, and read the reports the Director filed as proof of the child’s situation. The evidence reveals that the child has been witness to conjugal violence between her mother and her boyfriends, including Mr. A.

The child has been affected by these incidents and has nightmares about the conjugal violence to which she was exposed. [ 8 ] Under the circumstances, it is in the child’s best interest to be entrusted to her mother’s care with a social follow-up for a period of nine months. As stated at the hearing, the child was victim of neglect, as the mother failed to ensure proper medical and dental follow-up for her daughter, to provide lunch money and basic school supplies. Furthermore, the youth delegate had to insist for the mother to apply for the child's medicare card and for the child to be seen by a dentist.

In this context, an intensive social follow-up will be necessary to ensure that the child’s needs are met and that she has no longer exposed to any form of violence. [ 9 ] The evidence and the admissions made have convinced the Court that the security and development of the child are compromised. [ 10 ] THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 11 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 12 ] DECLARES compromised the security and development of the child, X; [ 13 ] ORDERS that the child, X, be entrusted to her mother’s care; [ 14 ] ORDERS that the child receive all health care services required by her situation and more particularly: • A medical check-up; • A dental follow-up and RECOMMENDS that the child have a dental check-up every six months; • That the child receive individual counselling and TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that the child has an appointment scheduled at the CLSC; [ 15 ] ORDERS the mother to collaborate with DYP, to meet the youth workers as requested and to inform them of any change of address or telephone number in a delay of 24 hours; [ 16 ] ORDERS the mother to ensure that the child is not exposed to any verbal or physical violence; [ 17 ] ORDERS the mother to ensure that the child attend school regularly; [ 18 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother receive follow-up for her personal issues; [ 19 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the child and her family for a period of nine months; [ 20 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X, to the Director of Youth Protection A Youth and Family Centres, who shall see that the measures are carried out; [ 21 ] ORDERS the execution of the present order by any peace officer.

Signed May 4, 2011 Ann-Marie Jones, J.C.Q. AMJ/dg Me Adelia Ferreira (Counsel for the D.Y.P.) Me Pauline Laforce (Counsel for the child) Me Marc Morin (Counsel for the mother) Date of hearing: April 29, 2011