2012 QCCQ 17277, 2012 QCCQ 17277

Protection de la jeunesse — 126783 2012 QCCQ 17277 JG2189 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] CITY OF [...] « Youth Division »

N os : 640-41-001386-116 640-41-001385-118 DATE : May 23, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE LISE GAGNON, J.Q.C. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN: X Born on […], 2011 Y Born on […], 2010 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A., working in City A (Quebec), district A; Petitioner -and- A , residing and domiciled in House A, City A (Quebec), district A; Mother -and- B , residing and domiciled in House A, City A (Quebec), district A; Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (Director) submits to the Court a motion for revision of a decision rendered on October 13, 2011 in which the Court entrusted the children, X and Y, to a foster family for a period of eight (8) months with a progressive reintegration with the parents if the situation would allow it.

On that day, the Court also ordered that both parents attend treatment to solve their drug and drinking problem. [ 2 ] Today, the Director recommends that the children be entrusted to a foster family for a period of six (6) months. The Director hopes that, this time, the parents will both benefit from therapies to solve the mother's drinking problem and the father drug addiction problem and that they will address their conjugal violence difficulties. [ 3 ] At the hearing, both parents are present and represented by attorney. They agree with the recommendations.

The mother is about to start her six-week therapy in A treatment center. As for the father, although he has been denying his drug problem for a long time, today, he admits consuming drugs and he is ready to undergo some therapy sessions to make sure his children will benefit from a sober father.

Both parents are also ready to address their conjugal violence problems. [ 4 ] Because of their renewed motivation to solve their problems, the parents ask the Court to allow the possible reintegration of the children if the situation evolved positively over the next few months. [ 5 ] The attorney for the children agrees with the recommendations made by the Director. As for the reintegration of the children in

the six (6) months period, he leaves it up to the Court. Update of the situation since October 13, 2011 [ 6 ] Soon after the decision, arrangements were made for the mother to attend the therapy at center A with her children. [ 7 ] On November 4, 2011, the mother started her therapy at center A in City B. A week later, she no longer wanted to pursue a therapy. She mentioned not wanting to take care of her children anymore.

Hearing that, the social worker from center A and the social worker from the Director tried to encourage the mother to pursue her goal. [ 8 ] Meanwhile, the father was very little supportive towards the mother's being in therapy. He wanted her back into to the household for his own personal interest. [ 9 ] When the children were about to integrate the Centre A to join their mother, she decided to leave the center and started consuming alcohol excessively. She also made suicidal threats. [ 10 ] Between December 2011 and April 2012, the mother's drinking problem amplified.

She often cancelled visits with her children because she was under the influence of alcohol. On many occasions, the mother was seen highly intoxicated. She could go on drinking for two (2) to three (3) days in a row. [ 11 ] During this period, the mother was incarcerated on different occasions for breaching her conditions to remain sober. [ 12 ] During the Christmas holiday, the mother was arrested for being involved in a family fight. [ 13 ] On March 2, 2012, she appeared in criminal Court. She could avoid a detention sentence because she agreed to attend a treatment center for alcohol.

Her case is now postponed to June 2012. [ 14 ] As for the father, on November 4, 2011, he was full of marks on his body. He explained that he got into a fight the previous night at the bar. [ 15 ] The father smokes marijuana all day long, says the mother. The father does not go to social services. [ 16 ] The relationship between the parents is very chaotic. They break up regularly and get back together soon after. [ 17 ] On April 12, 2012, the mother was covered with bruises.

She said that they were related to a violent fight between her and the father. [ 18 ] As for the contact between the parents and their children, the parents respected the visits that were scheduled 50 % of the time. Since April 2012, the parents are coming more regularly. [ 19 ] The children have been living with their paternal grandparents up until January 2012. In the grandparents' home, people often consume alcohol and drugs. The paternal uncle, C, integrated the household after serving a jail sentence for attempting to kill a police officer with a firearm.

The uncle was violent in the house and was returned to a detention center a few months after his release. [ 20 ] Because of the unsafe environment at the paternal grandfather's house, the children were placed in foster families in January 2012. [ 21 ] The children are both doing well in their foster family. However, Y remains very attached to her mother and she misses her.

Applicable measures [ 22 ] Very little progress has been made since the last Court order. [ 23 ] The Court is faced with two parents with great difficulties as far as alcohol, drugs and conjugal violence is concerned. [ 24 ] This time, both parents are telling the Court that they are committed to solve their problems in order to be able to recover their children's responsibility. [ 25 ] The parents are invited to put their words into action. [ 26 ] The parents cannot postpone or delay their commitment to solve their problems.

They need to start now, collaborate well with the services that will be offered to them and improve their situation. [ 27 ] If they do so, the children will be sent back to them, as their family environment will be safe for the children. [ 28 ] If not, the Court will have to think of a life plan for the children, a plan that may exclude their return to their parents, because children cannot wait all their life for responsible adults to take care of them. [ 29 ] As at now, a reintegration is clearly premature. The parents need to make changes first before any reintegration can be started.

THEREFORE, THE COURT: GRANTS the present petition amended; REVISES the decision rendered on October 13, 2011 by the Court;

DECLARES that the security and the development of X and Y are still endangered; ENTRUSTS X and Y to a foster family for a period of six (6) months ; ORDERS that the parents remain sober in the presence of their children; TAKES KNOWLEDGE and therefore ORDERS that both parents attend treatment therapy: - as for the mother, at the treatment center in City C; - as for the father, with the social services of his community; TAKES KNOWLEDGE that the contacts between the children and Mr.

D continue to be prohibited; ORDERS that visits between X, Y and their parents be encouraged and monitored closely by the D.Y.P. in terms of conditions, frequency and length and in the best interest of the children; ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counsel and assistance to X, Y and the parents for a period of six (6) months ; ENTRUSTS the situation of X and Y to the D.Y.P. A., for the execution of this order; ORDERS that the police collaborate in the execution of this order. _________________________________ LISE GAGNON, J.Q.C. M e Gabriel Gaudreault Attorney for the D.Y.P.

M e Jean-Francis Bonnette Attorney for the children M e Sarah Plamondon Attorney for the parents Date of hearing: May 23, 2012