2018 QCCQ 11580, 2018 QCCQ 11580

Protection de la jeunesse — 182109 2018 QCCQ 11580 JG1900 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] “Youth Division” No.: 550-41-002617-171 (

X) DATE: January 3, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING: THE HONOURABLE LINE GOSSELIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [Social worker 1] , duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection Applicant and X Child and a B In their capacity as parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcast of any information that would allow a child or the child’s parents to be identified.

Every person who contravenes this provision is liable to a fine (ss. 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A. ). [ 1 ] The Court has before it an application under ss. 38 and 75 of the Youth Protection Act for the protection of X, born on […], 2006. [ 2 ] The applicant proposes that the child be entrusted to his father, that he see his mother and her spouse under certain conditions, and that various other protective measures be ordered, applicable for one (1) year. [ 3 ] The grounds invoked are related to the unreasonable methods of upbringing used by the mother and her spouse, C, the emotional rejection that the child is subjected to (while also being required to do numerous chores in his mother’s home), and the mother’s tolerance of her spouse’s inappropriate behaviour towards the child. [ 4 ] The mother, through her counsel, denies the facts and contests the alleged grounds of endangerment.

She asks the Court to return X to her and her spouse. [ 5 ] She adds that X displays very serious behavioural problems. She claims that this is the only ground of endangerment that the Court should accept. In such case, she would accept social follow-up care for one (1) year. [ 6 ] The father, through his counsel, admits the facts that concern him (in custody for drug trafficking; lack of contact with X from December 2016 until the Director’s involvement in May 2017) and agrees with the conclusions. [ 7 ] X, through his counsel, wanted to express himself before the undersigned.

He wants to live with his father and see his mother and her spouse in the presence of a third person. [ 8 ] In addition to the admissions and the testimony, several documents were duly filed and supplement the evidence. [ 9 ] The hearing was held on July 3, August 3 and 4, November 21, and December 5, 2017. ENDANGERMENT AND PROTECTIVE MEASURES a. Hearing of July 3, 2017

[ 10 ] From all the evidence adduced to that date, the undersigned finds that as a result of the statements made by X, who expressed himself clearly, spontaneously, and in detail, certain protective measures (previously ordered on an interim basis) should be amended while the proceedings are in progress. [ 11 ] During his testimony, X had the time to explain the most recent incident that led to his removal from the home of his mother and her spouse in May 2017. [ 12 ] On that occasion, his mother’s spouse, C, slapped him in the face. X fell to the ground.

The mother’s spouse dragged him by the arm along the ground to the staircase. X went upstairs. He told his mother what happened and she ended up chasing him around an island unit. She hit him in the face and pulled his hair. X was able to get away and locked himself in the bathroom.

He admits to having kicked his mother accidentally. [ 13 ] X had several bruises and scratches on his body (D-4 en liasse ). [ 14 ] In this context, X, who has seen his mother and her spouse without supervision on a few occasions since then, says that without supervision, [ translation ] “I don’t feel good” in case [ translation ] “they start to say something to me”. He is happy living with his paternal grandparents and has positive contact with his father, who is taking himself in hand.

X also said that he would like to live with his father, with whom he has had little contact in the past. [ 15 ] In the circumstances, the evidence adduced establishes, on a balance of probabilities, that the protective measures should be revised for the duration of the proceedings. [ 16 ] For that reason, until the continuation of the hearing set for August 3, 2017, X is entrusted to his father and may see his mother and her spouse under certain conditions. Social follow-up care is also ordered. b.

Hearing of August 3 and 4, 2017 (continuation of the hearing for the review of measures for the duration of the proceedings due to lack of time) [ 17 ] On August 3, 2017, X continued his testimony. [ 18 ] In

summary, he explained each of the marks that he saw on the photos previously filed in the Court record. He did not remember where all of them came from but was able to confirm some of them. [ 19 ] In cross-examination, he said that [ translation ] “They’re the ones who knock me down” and that he does not throw himself to the ground as was suggested.

He again said that his mother [ translation ] “pulled him by the hair”, [ translation ] “slapped him”, and that he tumbled down [ translation ] “the last few stairs” of the staircase (this last aspect was confirmed by the mother during her testimony). [ 20 ] X added that his mother’s spouse makes him do numerous chores, especially when his mother is not there, such as cleaning the bathrooms (every nook and cranny), taking out the garbage, loading and unloading the dishwasher, tidying up, vacuuming, washing the floors, and shoveling the snow that accumulates at the entrance to the house, around the side of the house, and in the spot where C parks his truck. [ 21 ] When it was suggested that he could say no to C and consequently do less, X explained that if he says no, he has to redo the chore a second time.

He added, however, that it is normal for him to have to do a few chores to help his mother. [ 22 ] With respect to the May 4, 2017, incident (summarized above), he added that afterwards, C threw his clothes at him and told him that he did not deserve to sleep in his bed. X spent the night on the carpet without a pillow or blanket. [ 23 ] He also said that his punishments have included having to kneel in front of the door to a room, not having supper a few times, or having to eat in his room. Other times, he has been slapped but only rarely by his mother.

The May 4, 2017, situation was [ translation ] “worse” than usual. [ 24 ] He also denied having said that he loves C. He said that his mother tells him that his father brainwashes him. His mother (and

C) have suggested that he not ask to see his father (in the past) and even to [ translation ] “escape” if he sees him. [ 25 ] Finally, X said he is happy living with his paternal grandparents and is having fewer tantrums. He does not know the person with whom his mother wants him to live and is not really interested in going there. He visits his maternal grandparents (in the Niagara region) and enjoys their company.

It appears that during that time his mother calls him every day through FaceTime, and he has an aunt with whom he is close. [ 26 ] In this context, the applicant seeks the amendment of the measures applicable during the proceedings ordered on July 3, 2017, because the father is incarcerated. [ 27 ] The father testified in handcuffs before the undersigned. He was arrested on July 12, 2017. [ 28 ] He explained that he will be in custody for ninety (90) days. He did not comply with his conditions of release and relapsed into his substance use. He plans to obtain follow-up care to better manage his emotions.

He talks to X every day. He says that X has tantrums when he returns from seeing his mother. [ 29 ] The mother denies most of X’s statements. She says he is exaggerating the amount of chores he has to do (PMR-1) and that she has been at home for the past few months (on leave from work). She also denies having hit X. She says he has behavioural problems and gave a few examples (M-4, psychological assessment of X).

He therefore needs structured supervision, which the father cannot provide, and, when he is at his paternal grandparents’ home, X does not behave himself properly (e.g., has tantrums). [ 30 ] Finally, she does not want him to go to the A school because he failed there in the past. She is aware, however, that his paternal

grandparents live near that school and that X’s transportation to the school of her choice is problematic. It should also be noted that it is X who would have to assume that transportation time in addition to the time he spends attending school. [ 31 ] In

summary, other than the May 4, 2017, incident (which has not yet been totally explained by the people involved, including

C) and the methods of upbringing used by the mother and her spouse, the evidence of which still needs to be completed, it appears that X is also caught in the middle of a parental conflict that has been ongoing for several years. This will therefore be assessed by the Court during the next hearings. [ 32 ] As mentioned, X has been living with his paternal grandparents for a few months.

Moving him, as the mother suggests, to live with members of his extended family does not take into account X’s reality, as it would require him having to move again, and then a third time if he returns to live with either of his parents after the hearing. [ 33 ] For these reasons, the Court finds that it is in the interest of X and his stability to remain with his paternal grandparents.

They cooperate with the applicant, who will provide them with the support they need as part of X’s social follow-up care so that he can correct his conduct with them. [ 34 ] Other protective measures will also be ordered for the duration of the proceedings, including contact between the father and son by agreement with the applicant. With respect to X’s school attendance, the Court cannot currently get involved with its administrative policies. c. Hearing of November 21, 2017 [ 35 ] It could not take place. Counsel for the applicant was absent for health reasons. d.

Hearing of December 5, 2017 [ 36 ] At this hearing, the applicant proposed new protective measures, including that X remain with his parental grandparents, but for only five (5) months, and that he then return to live with his mother.

Other protective measures were also proposed, applicable for a period of one (1) year. [ 37 ] The grounds invoked are related to the quality of contact between X and his mother, her cooperation, her spouse’s participation in the “A” program, the father’s difficulty maintaining an appropriate lifestyle, and X’s serious behavioural problems at the home of his parental grandparents (who are receiving help from an experienced educator). [ 38 ] At the outset, the undersigned understands that the passage of time and the numerous social interventions with the family during the proceedings are factors that have favoured the progression of the situation. [ 39 ] The progression appears positive in X’s case, particularly with respect to his relationship with his mother. [ 40 ] In view of the fact that the conditions governing the mother-son contact have changed over time, they have allowed X to regain trust in his mother, who is re-establishing a positive relationship with him. [ 41 ] The result is that X now talks about returning to live with his mother, and her spouse agrees to give X and his mother time alone and obtain counselling to better manage his emotions. [ 42 ] This is all very well; however, the mother significantly nuanced the facts reported by X in regard to the May 4, 2017, incident (and the chores) and said it was more a result of X’s problematic behaviour. [ 43 ] The mother’s spouse, C, denies the facts but agrees that he is the one who makes the rules, encourages strict supervision, and maintains discipline. [ 44 ] It is clear that the mother had abandoned her parental role in regard to X as she had confidence in her spouse’s way of doing things.

Fortunately, she wants to reclaim her role and encourage a healthier relationship between herself and X. [ 45 ] That being said, X needs help while living with his paternal grandparents, who, in turn, need to learn to control his problematic behaviour. [ 46 ] According to the educator providing them with support, X is a young man of few words, who has very high anxiety and needs significant reassurance. [ 47 ] X is unable to manage his anger.

He has tantrums, and he is violent. [ 48 ] In this context, the educator met with X’s parents to try and understand what is really going on. [ 49 ] Following this meeting, the educator, Richard Denault, explained to the undersigned during his testimony that it is important for each of the parents to clarify with X what role X plays in their lives. [ 50 ] In fact, it should be noted that X’s parents rebuilt their lives after their separation. Since then, a conflict has persisted between them.

They criticize each other, and this was readily apparent to the Court during their respective testimony. [ 51 ] X is caught in the middle of this conflict. In addition, his mother’s spouse, who sees only X’s negative side, disciplines him constantly, while his mother neglects him. His father, whom X idealizes, is absent from his life, comes back, and is then incarcerated again. e. Conclusion

[ 52 ] First, the undersigned reiterates that X’s testimony was impressive. [ 53 ] Although he is of few words, he was able to express himself with ease before the undersigned. The sequence of events that took place on May 4, 2017, is probative.

The details, precision, nuances, and emotions expressed by X during the proceedings regarding the incident have convinced the Court that on May 4, 2017, X was the victim of physical abuse by his mother and her spouse, who used unreasonable methods of upbringing in view of the extent, frequency, and rigidity of the structure he imposes on X (chores and other methods). [ 54 ] Second, the conflict between the parents is significant, and the tension between them is palpable as soon as one of them says anything about the other. [ 55 ] Third, it is true that X displays behavioural problems. [ 56 ] However, in view of the fact that he is caught in the middle of the conflict between his parents and that he questions his true place in their lives, X’s behavioural problems are a reaction to his experience. [ 57 ] Finally, the Court hopes that the father’s criminal lifestyle is over, as he has clearly stated that it is.

He must also make the right choices, including remaining in X’s life; otherwise, he runs the risk of losing X’s trust in the future. [ 58 ] Finally, the undersigned understands that the mother is truly making an effort, as is her spouse.

Soon, all the services will be in place so that X can return to live with his mother, which he has started to talk about. [ 59 ] Consequently, the Court finds that X should remain with his paternal grandparents (with the educator’s help) for five (5) months (as of the last hearing date) and then return to live with his mother. [ 60 ] X’s contact with his parents does not require supervision, given how the situation has evolved, nor does his contact with C, who has taken certain steps to change and make room for X in his mother’s life. [ 61 ] Other protective measures will also be ordered for a period of one (1) year (from the last hearing date) to give the family time to find means of correcting the situation of endangerment. [ 62 ] The Court hopes that the educator will continue to provide services to ensure X’s transition to his mother’s home and orders this in accordance with the Act . [ 63 ] The application is founded in law; it is in the interest of X and respects his rights.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 64 ] ALLOWS the application in part; [ 65 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are in danger due to physical abuse by his mother and her spouse (who also uses unreasonable methods of upbringing) and the conflict between the parents, which concerns X, whose behavioural disturbance is a reaction to his situation; [ 66 ] ORDERS the execution of the following protective measures until December 5, 2018:

a) That X be entrusted to his paternal grandparents until May 5, 2018 ;

b) That as of May 5, 2018, X remain with his mother;

c) That the father’s contact with X take place by agreement with the case worker;

d) That , while X is living with his paternal grandparents, contact with the mother and her spouse, C, take place by agreement between the mother and the case worker;

e) That X receive the health care and health services required by his situation;

f) That the parents and C, who consent thereto, take an active

part in the measures ordered: 1. That they cooperate with social follow-up care and the follow-up care provided by the educator; 2. That they participate in the necessary follow-up care;

g) That a person working for an institution or body designated by the Director of Youth Protection provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and his family;

h) That a person (educator) working for an institution or body designated by the Director of Youth Protection provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and his family for the period of time deemed necessary; [ 67 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of this decision.

__________________________________ Line Gosselin J.C.Q. Mtre Émilie De Bellefeuille, for the Director of Youth Protection Mtre Claude Dostie, for X Mtre Amélie Samson, for the mother Mtre Louis-Martin Lussier, for the father Date of hearing: July 3, August 3 and 4, November 21, and December 5, 2017 Date of filing with the registry: January 3, 2018 /mr