2015 QCCQ 13586, 2015 QCCQ 13586

Protection de la jeunesse — 152948 2015 QCCQ 13586 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000659-151 DATE: February 24, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ MRS [SOCIAL WORKER 1], exercising her profession at the Centre jeunesse A , having a place of business at […] at City A , district A , […] Applicant -and- X, residing at […] in City B , district A , […] Adolescent -and- MRS A, domiciled and residing at […] in City C , district A , […] Mother -and- MR B, unknown address Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Sections 38 & 75 of the Youth Protection Act) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection makes an application to have the security and development of X , born on [...] , 2001, declared endangered due to a serious risk of neglect as defined at subparagraph 38 (b) (2) of the Youth Protection Act and also because he is victim of neglect following subparagraph 38 (b) (1)(iii) Y.P.A. [ 2 ] The mother and adolescent are present and both represented by counsel. Although he was duly served the father is absent.

The applicant nevertheless spoke to the father a few days before the hearing. He told the applicant that he does not have a fix address. He spends time either in City D or in his community of City C . He is not involved in the life of his son. The Court therefore decided that it was in the best interest of X to proceed in the absence of the father. ISSUE TO RESOLVE [ 3 ] The present case does not raise any litigious issue since the parties admit that the security and the development of the adolescent are in danger on the grounds alleged by the Director of Youth Protection.

In addition, the parties consent to the main recommendation made by the Director which provides that X be entrusted to Mrs C for a period of six months. THE FACTS [ 4 ] The Director of Youth Protection has been involved with the family for almost nine years now. X has been victim of parental neglect. Several placements were ordered because of the parents’ struggle with domestic violence and alcohol abuse. In 2011, after being entrusted to his paternal grandmother, X ’s situation was revised as the mother had shown much improvement regarding her personal situation and her alcohol consumption.

Accordingly, X and his brother were entrusted to the mother. Afterwards, the file was closed by the Director of Youth Protection. In 2012, a new report was received regarding serious behavioral disturbance by the adolescent. The report was also closed after the application of protective measures. [ 5 ] It appears that the father plays no role in the adolescent’s life. As previously mentioned, he is presently homeless as he is roaming from City D to City C .

[ 6 ] The evidence shows that since April 2014, the mother shows a pattern of moving from one town to the next. She first moved to City E and came back to City C as the children’s schooling was problematic. Shortly after, the mother began a relationship with a man living in City F . She moved there with her sons. The relationship has been rocky and consequently the mother has been going back and forth from City C to City F . [ 7 ] X came back to City C in November 2014 and the mother entrusted him to C . Until recently and as a result of the mother’s instability, X school attendance was poor.

Without clear boundaries, the adolescent also resorted to drug consumption and expressed suicidal thoughts. [ 8 ] Following a report filed in January 2015, a provisional foster care order was rendered on February 6 by which the adolescent was entrusted to Mrs C . During that hearing the mother expressed the intent to stabilize her life. However, she failed to show up at the first meeting with the applicant and left soon after to go back to City F .The applicant tried to come into contact with the mother who was obviously avoiding the applicant.

The mother came back to City C a few days before the hearing. [ 9 ] Considering the admissions and the evidence heard, the Court is convinced that the security and development of the adolescent are endangered following the grounds set out by the Director of Youth Protection.

APPLICABLE MEASURES [ 10 ] In light of the foregoing, the Director of Youth Protection requests that the adolescent be entrusted to a distant aunt, Mrs C , for a period of six months. [ 11 ] In support of her recommendations, the applicant emphasizes the importance for the mother to put herself in action as soon as possible considering the family history and the consequences this has had for X . Without any concrete change in the next months, the applicant will develop a life project. [ 12 ] Everyone must be sensitive to the fact the X clearly expresses his need for security and stability.

He was forthright with the applicant by expressing his discomfort with his mother’s drinking and feeling or being treated unfairly by her. [ 13 ] X has been living with Mrs B since November which has helped him gain a certain sense of security. He is able to show conformity to the rules set out by Mrs B which prohibit any drug consumption. Moreover, he is attending school on a regular basis. The recurrent instability in the life of the mother speaks loudly and proves that X is still in need of protection. [ 14 ] The mother’s intentions in regards to her relationship to Mr D remain unclear.

For now, she seems to be oblivious to her son’s needs. She must first stabilize her own life before she can offer security to her own son. Considering the family history, to further subject X to instability and neglect would seriously jeopardize his development. [ 15 ] Accordingly, the proposed measures are reasonable, as they will allow the Court to determine if the mother is able to provide a secure and stable environment for herself and her child on the short term. Otherwise, in the best interest of X , more permanent measures to insure his stability and security will be put in place.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS the petition; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the adolescent are endangered pursuant to subparagraph 38 (b) (2) and 38 (b) (1)(iii) Y.P.A.; [ 18 ] ENTRUSTS the adolescent to Mrs C for a period of six months; [ 19 ] TAKES NOTICE that Mrs C will be assessed to be a certified foster family; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to the foster family operated by Mrs C , in the event that she is accredited as such by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the contacts between X and his parents be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as to frequency and modalities; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the mother report to the Director of Youth Protection on a regular basis; [ 23 ] ORDERS the mother to participate in the measures designed to put an end to the situation endangering the security and development of the adolescent; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the mother benefit from an individual follow-up, notably concerning her alcohol consumption as long as deemed necessary by the said professional; [ 25 ] ORDERS the mother not to consume any drug or alcohol in the presence of her children and that she remains sober in front of them; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the mother take the necessary measures to ensure that the youth is not in the presence of people under the influence of drugs or alcohol; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the mother inform the Director of Youth Protection of her whereabouts with the adolescent outside A and that she previously requests approval from the Director as to the place where she will bring him;

[ 28 ] ORDERS that X attend school on a regular basis; [ 29 ] ORDERS that a person working for institution or body provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and his parents for a period of nine months; [ 30 ] ALLOWS all the professionals involved in the case to exchange information concerning the evolution of the follow-up in general.

The patient and professional privilege will remain for the rest; [ 31 ] ALLOWS the Director of Youth Protection to sign authorizations pertaining to school activities and medical care, in the event that neither parent can be reached; [ 32 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate to the execution of the present judgment; [ 33 ] ENTRUSTS the youth's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of the present judgment. __________________________________ NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q. M e Julie Lemire Lemire, Gaouette & Martel Centre jeunesse A Lawyer for the D.Y.P.

M e Sébastien Lebel Lawyer for the youth M e Daniel Ouellette Lawyer for the mother Date of hearing: February 18, 2015