2014 QCCQ 13928, 2014 QCCQ 13928

Protection de la jeunesse — 142122 2014 QCCQ 13928 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000385-088 DATE: May 15, 2014 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on […], 1997 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection working at the Centre Jeunesse A, having a place of business at […] in TOWN A, district A (Quebec) […] Applicant A , unknown address Mother and B , Director of Youth Protection of the Centre Jeunesse A, having a place of business at […] in TOWN B, district B (Quebec) […] Tutor ______________________________________________________________________ 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 applicant asks the Court to review and extend the decision rendered on September 18, 2013 by Judge Nancy McKenna. In her decision Judge McKenna maintained that the security and development of X, born on […], 1997 was still endangered notably in regards to serious behavioural problems.

She ordered that the youth be entrusted to a rehabilitation center for a period of six months. [ 2 ] According to the applicant the review of the decision is necessary because the youth still displays behavioural problems. If the Court maintains that the security and development of the youth are still endangered the applicant recommends the entrustment of the youth in a rehabilitation center for six months. [ 3 ] The youth is present and represented by his lawyer. He admits that his security and development are still endangered and agrees to the applicant's recommendations. [ 4 ] The mother is absent.

Presently she is homeless. However the applicant was able to reach the mother and she told her about the petition. The mother was served the day prior the Court hearing. She told the applicant that she agreed to the recommendations but would like that the entrustment in a rehabilitation center would be ordered for less than six months. [ 5 ] The Court grants the permission to the parties to proceed in the mother's absence. [ 6 ] The Court considers the following facts as proven by preponderant evidence. The facts [ 7 ] The youth is now […] years old.

He is currently residing at the rehabilitation center in TOWN C. He was having regular weekend visits with his family in TOWN A but those visits were in question because the youth returned to the center disorganised and it took days to get him stabilized. [ 8 ] In the last year the youth had many behavioural problems. [ 9 ] In the last year he went in some different foster families. The last two families he was entrusted to had reported that it was too difficult to take care of him.

At this time the youth is unable to function in a foster family due to his serious behavioural disturbances including sneaking out of the house, smoking marijuana, disrespecting rules and skipping school. [ 10 ] In regards to schooling, according to the applicant it is not the youth's priority because he has others. Actually the youth is not interested in going to school. [ 11 ] At the rehabilitation center there was an event that took place where the youth was certain there was an insect in his skin and

that it was still there. The youth scratched himself so hard that it left a scab. [ 12 ] Recently the youth underwent a child psychiatrist assessment. That assessment revealed that the youth had developed a psychosis probably caused by drugs. A medication has been prescribed to the youth by the child psychiatrist. [ 13 ] The youth began medication and things immediately improved for him until his visit home. [ 14 ] Over the holidays the applicant thought that since things were going so well they would allow a longer visit than just a weekend.

It was tried but upon return to the center the youth was disorganised and misbehaved. The visits were hold off for a bit to get the youth stabilized. It was explained in more details to the persons the youth was visiting the importance of the medication and that she physically needs to watch him take the medication. It was tried again for a short weekend but upon his return to the center the youth was disorganised again. [ 15 ] The reasons why the youth was still showing declines after outing was initially because he was not taking his medication.

But those declines were still present even after the family reported that the youth was actually taking his medication. For those reasons the dose of medication was increased. [ 16 ] The youth has tendencies to use marijuana. He is aware that the Centre A addiction services are available to him. However he refuses to collaborate. [ 17 ] The mother and the youth have a strong bond and love each other very much.

The mother's involvement in the youth's life is very inconsistent as she lives an unstable life herself. [ 18 ] In regards to visiting with her son she has asked to come to the center with the Director of Youth Protection worker on two occasions and never followed through. She does see him when he is home visiting with the condition that she remains sober and keep people under the influence away from her son. [ 19 ] The mother remains very close to her son even though the contacts are inconsistent.

She is capable of having a big impact on her son and of being a positive influence. [ 20 ] Since the last Court orders were rendered the youth had visits in his community. More than one time he was not able to conform to the rules settled prior to the visits. When he was back to the center he had difficulties to conform to the rules set in there. [ 21 ] According to the applicant it is best that the youth becomes stabilized with his medication before changing his environment.

Also taking care of his mental health and following the program at the center take important efforts on the youth's part. [ 22 ] The evidence reveals that the youth needs the structure of the rehabilitation center to help him to improve his mental health and his behaviours.

Even though the visits are proven to make things difficult it is important to maintain the contact between the youth, his family and community. [ 23 ] Considering all the evidence including the admissions from the youth the Court concludes that the security and development of the youth are still endangered and that the Director of Youth Protection recommendations concerning the measures are appropriate, reasonable and in the best interest of the youth.

For these reasons the Court: [ 24 ] Grants the motion; [ 25 ] Maintains that the security and development of X, born on […], 1997 are still compromised; [ 26 ] Orders that the youth be entrusted to a rehabilitation center for a period of six months and the youth could be reintegrated into a family setting with regular visits during his placement in the center if the situation allows it; [ 27 ] Authorizes the director of the youth protection to settle supervised visit of the youth in a foster family for six months for the purpose of reintegration of the youth, those visits will be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection has for the frequency, modalities and length; [ 28 ] Orders to the youth and his mother to take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Tribunal; [ 29 ] Orders the Director of Youth Protection to provide regular contacts between the youth and his brother Y as often as possible; [ 30 ] Orders that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counselling and assistance to the youth and his family until majority; [ 31 ] Orders that the contacts between the youth and his mother be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for the frequency, modalities and length; [ 32 ] Orders that the youth receive specific health care and services such as follow-up with the child psychiatrist and addiction assessment from the Centre A with follow-up if deemed necessary and the Court takes judicial notice of the consent of the youth to be assessed by the Centre A; [ 33 ] Orders that the youth attend school, another place of learning or participates in a program geared to develop skills and autonomy; [ 34 ] Orders that the exercise of certain attributes of parental authority be withdrawn from the mother and granted to the Director of

Youth Protection for primary medical and health care, sports, leisure and school activities; [ 35 ] ORDERS any police body to collaborate for the purpose of executing this enactment; [ 36 ] ENTRUSTS the child’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of this enactment __________________________________ Josée Bélanger, J.C.Q. Me Julie Lemire, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Sébastien Lebel, attorney for the youth Date of hearing: March 20, 2014