2016 QCCQ 16924, 2016 QCCQ 16924

Protection de la jeunesse — 167834 2016 QCCQ 16924 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] Youth Division No: 105-41-000422-163 DATE: November 8, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant -and- X born on […], 2000 Adolescent -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 declare that the security or development of the adolescent is in danger, because of allegations of unreasonable educative and mental-health problems of the mother. [ 2 ] The adolescent did not want to be present, but she is represented by a lawyer. Her counsel expresses his consent to the measures proposed by the DYP and the filing of the reports to value the testimony of their authors. [ 3 ] The father is not present in Court.

He has not been part of his daughter’s life since her birth. He has not been implicated nor wanted information about the situation of his child. [ 4 ] At the hearing, the mother is present but not represented; she wishes to proceed without counseling. She disagrees with most facts of the application and with the recommendations of the DYP. She consents to the filing of the reports to value the testimony of their authors. [ 5 ] On August 16, 2016, a provisional agreement during evaluation entrusted the adolescent to a foster family for a period of thirty days.

On September 6, 2016, a provisional measure was ordered for another thirty days. [ 6 ] Previously, in February 2016, both mother and daughter received services from the CLSC to work on their relationship because they had a lot of arguments and sometimes even fights. [ 7 ] The mother contests the application and wishes for her daughter to return home. She says she had the time to think, and she understands now that the head trauma she suffered makes her say or do things that she regrets afterwards. [ 8 ] Around 2013, her daughter started to have an attitude problem.

She woke up one day and was throwing things on the floor. She was becoming a teenager, so she had to take difficult decisions towards her. She did not want to go to school, and she had to intervene physically with her. She mentions that this will never happen again. Before, everything was fine between her daughter and her. They were best friends. [ 9 ] She testifies that she took appointments with someone for her personnel issues. Her daughter doesn’t want to talk to her, and she even blocked her from all social media.

She implies that when she doesn’t have a symptom related to her head injury, their relationship is very good. [ 10 ] She will never hurt her intentionally. She loves her and wants the best for her. She wishes that her daughter gets an education.

She is convinced that all the problems they have can easily be fixed. [ 11 ] The mother, while testifying, was very emotional and confused. Her mood changed throughout the hearing. The mother is inconsistent, impulsive and unstable. During that time, we can easily notice many facts, and behaviors mention in the psychosocial report concerning the mother. [ 12 ] The adolescent does not want to live with her mother. She does not get along with her. They were even calling each other names. She says that her mother hurt her physically and mentally. She is not ready, for the moment, to have contact with her mother.

Their relationship has to be rebuilt. For the time being, she is comfortable with her current foster family, and she is doing well. [ 13 ] The evidence demonstrates that the adolescent requires a stable and safe environment, and the mother is not able to provide that for the moment. Furthermore, she needs to develop her autonomy before she reaches majority. Stability will help her to achieve that goal. [ 14 ] The evidence demonstrates that the security and development of the adolescent are in danger. Under the circumstances, the application is well founded.

The suggested measures appear to be in her best interest. THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 15 ] GRANTS the application for protection; [ 16 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of X are in danger according to

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 17 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to a foster family designated by the DYP until September 30, 2017; [ 18 ] ORDERS that contacts between the adolescent and her mother take place under an agreement between the parties; [ 19 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother take an active

part in the services that are offered to her for her personal difficulties; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and her parents participate actively in the application of the measures ordered to put an end to the situation of endangerment; [ 21 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and her family until September 30, 2017; [ 22 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent 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 Alexis Deschênes for the child Mrs A the mother B the father (absent) Date of hearing: October 4, 2016