2022 QCCQ 2364, 2022 QCCQ 2364

Protection de la jeunesse — 221766 2022 QCCQ 2364 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-51-000368-219 DATE: January 19, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X , born on [...], 2012 Child ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , interim assistant Director of Youth Protection of Centre Jeunesse A Petitioner -and- A B Parents -and- C Tutor/Mise-en-cause -and- LE CURATEUR PUBLIC DU QUÉBEC Mis-en-cause ______________________________________________________________________ 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 seeks the deferment of the tutorship of the child to her foster parent, Ms. C. [ 2 ] The parents and the attorney for the child consent to this deferment. [ 3 ] The mother asks that the Court render additional orders suspending the father’s contacts and order the confidentiality of the child’s address, the whole in conformity with the protection order in force.

This request being contested, the Court hears the parties. [ 4 ] After evaluating the evidence, the Court grants the conclusions requested by the Director of Youth Protection. The following elements justify the decision. [ 5 ] The Legal Context [ 6 ] The Court cites the legislative foundation of the Director's request as provided in the Youth Protection Act : 70.1 If a child is in one of the situations described in

section 207 of the Civil Code and the director has taken charge of the child's situation, the director may apply to the tribunal to be appointed as tutor or to have a person he recommends appointed as tutor if he considers that tutorship is the measure most likely to protect the interest of the child and ensure the respect of his rights.

Following the application, the tribunal may appoint a tutor if it considers, in the interest of the child, that such a measure is appropriate. The rules of the Civil Code apply to the tutorship, subject to the provisions of this Act. [ 7 ] As prescribed in the preceding article, the Court must conclude to existence of one of the conditions of

article 207 of the Civil Code , which provides: The director of youth protection or the person recommended as tutor by him may also apply for the institution of tutorship to an orphan who is a minor and who has no tutor, or to a child whose father and mother both fail, in fact, to assume his care, maintenance or education, or to a child who in all likelihood would be in danger if he returned to his father and mother. [ 8 ] Concurrent to the decision to defer tutorship, the Court may render additional measures as prescribed by the child’s best interests, including maintaining personal relationships (article 70.6 Youth Protection Act ). [ 9 ] Analysis and decision [ 10 ] The child lives with Ms C since May 2015.

She continues to evolve positively and is significantly attached to her foster parents. [ 11 ] After a succession of judgments of protection, the Court stabilizes the child in this environment until her majority (judgment dated September 9, 2020 – exhibit D-2). [ 12 ] In fact, the child has had little or no contacts with her parents for many years as the last contact with her father is in August 2015 and with her mother, in May 2017.

Contacts are eventually suspended by the Court in reason of the parent’s instability and inability to invest themselves in contacts nor a process of rehabilitation. [ 13 ] The last judgment forbids contacts between the child and her parents save for a recognized therapeutic need, as well as restricting the exercise of their parental authority. [ 14 ] The mother testifies to having stabilized her lifestyle and to maintaining her sobriety. The father continues to struggle with his personal issues on all levels.

At the date of the hearing, he is in custody in reason of criminal charges. [ 15 ] Both parents wish to eventually renew their relationship with their daughter. They state being ready to respect any decision made by Ms. C in this respect, being confident of her ability to judge their daughter’s best interests. [ 16 ] Although X hasn’t seen her parents for a long time, she mentions to her attorney being happy of the prospect of having contacts. [ 17 ] Ms.

C agrees to being deferred the tutorship of the child and convinces the Court of her ability and understanding of the obligations that such entails. [ 18 ] On the issue of interactions with the parents and/or contacts with the child, she is aware of the challenges in play. [ 19 ] She considers being ready and able to deal with these issues after having assessed the situation and fully considered the child’s wishes and best interests.

She testifies to being confident of being able to do so autonomously and doesn’t feel the need for additional orders. [ 20 ] The Director of Youth Protection as well as the child’s attorney are also of this opinion. After consideration, the Court is also convinced of such. FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 21 ] GRANTS the application; [ 22 ] DEFERS the tutorship of the child X to Ms. C; [ 23 ] ENTRUSTS the child to her tutor, Ms. C; [ 24 ] THE WHOLE without costs. __________________________________ BÉATRI CE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Mylène Francoeur Attorney for the Applicant Me Annie Girard Attorney for the child

Date of hearing: January 19, 2022 Date of signature: March 7, 2022