2019 QCCQ 18785, 2019 QCCQ 18785

Protection de la jeunesse — 197990 2019 QCCQ 18785 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] TOWN OF […] Youth Division No: 145-41-000434-131 DATE: October 10, 2019 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant -and- X born on […], 2011 Child -and- A -and- B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ 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 director of youth protection (DYP) asks the Court to revise and extend the order rendered on October 4, 2018, in respect of the child in order to place her until the age of majority. Her siblings are aimed by the same proceedings. We proceed by common evidence. [ 2 ] The parents are absent even though they were duly notified of the proceedings. The child is represented by a lawyer who expresses that she likes her foster family and does not have any contact with her parents.

It is agreed that the report be filed to value testimony of its authors. [ 3 ] The DYP has been involved with this family for a long time. For many years now the children have been entrusted to a foster family.

Through that period, the situation of the parents did not evolve. [ 4 ] At one point the children were confided to the paternal grandmother but they had to be removed from that environment because the latter gave the father unlimited access to the children without the DYP’s permission. [ 5 ] The father does not take any steps with the DYP to see his children or inquire about them and he does not get involved with the services. [ 6 ] As for the mother, she visits her children under supervision but she is not consistent. She does not ask for a visit

schedule to be planned with her children. She goes directly to the foster family to see them with the permission of the DYP unlike the father. Basically, the mother attempts to use services but not the father. The parents are hard to reach and don’t provide their phone number. [ 7 ] The children are doing well in their foster family with whom they lived with for the past two years. This family looks after their needs and make sure they attend all the necessary appointments required. They provide them a stable and carrying place. The foster mother testifies to her intention to care for the children until their majority. They are completely part of the family.

[ 8 ] The evidence demonstrates that the security and development of the child are still in danger. Under the circumstances and considering the evidence the application is well founded. The suggested measures appear to be in the best interest of the child. FOR THESE REASONS AND THOSE EXPRESSED ORALLY AT THE HEARING, THE COURT: [ 9 ] GRANTS the application for revision and extension of order; [ 10 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still considered to be in danger according to

section 38 of the Youth protection act ; [ 11 ] REVISES AND EXTENDS the judgment rendered on October 4, 2018; [ 12 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family designated by the DYP, namely the one of Ms. C and Mr.

D until the age of her majority on […], 2029. [ 13 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and her parents be determined according to agreement between the parties and that they be supervised, as long as deemed necessary by the DYP; [ 14 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and her paternal grandmother E be determined according to an agreement between the parties and that they be supervised, as long as deemed necessary by the DYP; [ 15 ] ALLOWS the different professionals involved with the child to exchange the relevant information, and this, in the interest of the child; [ 16 ] REMOVES the exercise of the parental authority’s attributes from the parents regarding medical clearance, school authorizations, social and other authorizations, authorization for driving license, including passport application and ALLOWS the DYP or the foster family to sign instead; [ 17 ] ORDERS the parents to be sober in the presence of the child; [ 18 ] FORBIDS the parents from exposing the child to any form of violence during supervised visits; [ 19 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents involve themselves in a follow-up regarding their personal difficulties, including drugs addictions; [ 20 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents submit to a parenting abilities assessment; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the parents actively participate in the application of the measures ordered; [ 22 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her family until the age of majority, […], 2029; [ 23 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the DYP of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A for the carrying out of the present judgment __________________________________ CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q.

Me Louyse A. Lemieux for the applicant Me Jules Grenier for the child Mrs. A the mother (absent) Mr. B the father (absent) Written judgment filed on October 15, 2019.