2019 QCCQ 17758, 2019 QCCQ 17758

Protection de la jeunesse — 196507 2019 QCCQ 17758 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] « Youth Division »

No: 145-41-000562-170 DATE: August 15, 2019 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE HERMINA POPESCU, Q.C.J. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant and X (born on […], 2017) Child and A Mother and B Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON APPLICATION FOR REVISION ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act (Y.P.A.) 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 ] Arguing that new facts have arisen since the last Court order of August 8, 2018, the Director of Youth Protection (DYP) is asking that the child be entrusted to him and to be placed in a foster family until his full age. [ 2 ] The parties agree to proceed jointly in the situation of Y (5 years old) and X (2 years old). [ 3 ] During the hearing, the parents consent to the sought after conclusions. [ 4 ] A brief reminder of the Court’s orders in the situation of the child is needed. [ 5 ] On September 7, 2017, the Honorable Judge Poirier declares that the security and development of the child are endangered because of his parents’ addiction as well as the domestic violence which represented for him a serious risk of neglect. [ 6 ] Two days before giving birth to X, the mother is victim of domestic violence.

As a result, she suffered multiple bruises, swelling, a hernia in the navel area with dried blood around it. Y is then present. [ 7 ] X is born addicted to drugs and had to remain at the hospital for several weeks, as he suffered from withdrawals to methadone, benzodiazepines and cocaine. [ 8 ] X was entrusted to a foster family at his birth (maternal aunt). [ 9 ] Judge Poirier underlines that the mother was full of good intentions, but her good intentions do not materialize and last.

Before the hearing, mother attended a detox program and planned to enter therapy, therapy that was supposed to last during several months. [ 10 ] As the mother was supposed to attend therapy in a structured environment, to which she could attend with X, Judge Poirier entrusts X to a foster family until his mother entered a therapy and then ordered that the child be entrusted to his mother as long as she attended that therapy. [ 11 ] On August 8, 2018, Judge Poirier revised this order. Mother was then in a women shelter, where she could see her children.

However, she left shortly afterwards to go back to her apartment and live, on and off, with the father. [ 12 ] The mother struggled with serious addiction problems, and even if on few occasions she undertook steps in order to enter treatment, she either not attended the meetings or left prematurely.

[ 13 ] Since the last Court order, the mother was supposed to start a drug rehabilitation program in the [A Community], on August 13, 2018. She was also supposed to enter a detoxification center on August 6, 2018.

This last program was set for 6 weeks and was meant to help her deal with the addiction issues, but again this failed because of her lack of commitment. [ 14 ] Indeed, on September and October 2018, [social worker 1], authorized person in the child’s situation, was informed that the mother lost all her applications for treatment as the addiction workers were judging that she was sabotaging her way to treatment. [ 15 ] The mother visited X and Y while they were living with the maternal grandmother and contacts were then supervised by the extended family.

It was reported that the mother preferred to spend time with Y, and not so much with X. [ 16 ] During the revision of the case, on November 13, 2018, the mother was present through teleconference. She was then informed that because of her non commitment to try and resolve her personal issues, long term measures were to be applied concerning the situation of the child. The mother hang up the phone immediately afterwards she was informed of this. [ 17 ] As for the father, he is a fisherman and is basically absent from the life of the children.

When informed of the orientation of the child situation, father agrees to the recommendations. [ 18 ] During the hearing, the father explains that his work keeps him busy from March to November. He can be absent during few days. However, he recognizes that domestic violence is not acceptable. He is willing to receive professional help with regard to his anger management problem as soon as the fishing season is off. [ 19 ] In the past, the mother avoided and made little attempt to follow therapy and meetings.

The mother felt she was the victim but she was in denial as per the direct impact of her addiction on her ability to be a good mother. Also, the domestic violence was present. [ 20 ] Indeed, parents still live together. [ 21 ] Fortunately, mother’s evolution is positive. [ 22 ] On April 1, 2019, she attended the [Center A] in Town A, Province A that she completed on April 26, 2019. [ 23 ] At the end of this program, the mother returned to her apartment. Mister [social worker 1] set up with her a visitation rights schedule. Even if the

schedule included supervised visits at her apartment, she decided not to have those visits at the apartment because of rodent issue. Instead, the first visit took place at a friend’s apartment and the next ones at the father’s home. [ 24 ] The contacts of the child with his parents had a good impact on the child, even though mother prefers spending time with Y and not so much with X.

It is difficult for the mother to take care of both children and do other activities (eg. cleaning, etc.) in the same time. [ 25 ] Since the end of April, 2019, mother continued to attend meetings with the addiction workers from the Center B and of the Community B From the A Health Center. She is also attending AA meetings.

Also, the mother receives services of an external educator from Restigouche Family Services. [ 26 ] The security and development of the child are still endangered because he is in a situation of serious risk of neglect and risk of exposure to spousal abuse. [ 27 ] The mother intends to continue working on her addictions and to improve her personal situation. She intends to start very shortly a mother and child program of 7 to 9 months duration, at Centre C. She will start this program alone and if her evolution is positive, Y and X could go and see her. [ 28 ] C is the maternal aunt of the child.

X was entrusted to her in July 2017 and Y on February 2018. She explains that both children adjusted very well. She is working full time but the children do attend school and daycare. She believes that contacts between the child and his parents are in the best interest of the child and does not oppose to these contacts. [ 29 ] She is willing to take care of X until his majority. Unfortunately, the mother’s situation is still fragile and does not allow her to take care of X in the short term. However, the best interest of X requires a permanent life project as the maximum delays of

section 91.1 Y.P.A. are now reached.

THEREFORE, THE COURT : [ 30 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still considered to be endangered; [ 31 ] REVISES and EXTENDS the Court order rendered on August 8, 2018; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the child remains in a foster family until his majority on […], 2035 ; [ 33 ] TAKES NOTICE that this foster family is the family of the maternal aunt, C; [ 34 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and parents be determined according to agreement between the parties and that they be supervised as long as deemed necessary by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 35 ] ORDERS that the different professionals involved in the situation of the child and of the parents exchange the information relevant to the child situation; [ 36 ] REMOVES to parents certain attributes of parental authority regarding medical clearance, school authorities, social and other permission, including a passport application in case that the parents are not unreachable or if they unjustly refuse and

[ 37 ] ALLOWS the Director of Youth Protection to exercise those attributes in these specific cases; [ 38 ] ORDERS the parents to be sober anytime in the presence of the child; [ 39 ] ORDERS the parents not to expose the child to any form of violence, physical or verbal; [ 40 ] PROHIBITS the parents to denigrate each other in the presence of the child; [ 41 ] STRONGLY RECOMMANDS to parents to submit to random screenings of drugs and/or alcohol test; [ 42 ] STRONGLY RECOMMANDS to parents to engage in psychological counselling in connection with their personal difficulties, including drugs addiction follow-up; [ 43 ] STRONGLY RECOMMANDS to parents to submit to an assessment of their abilities in parenting; [ 44 ] ORDERS that the child maintain relationship with his sibling and grandparents in a manner to be determined; [ 45 ] ORDERS that the child and his parents actively participate in the application of this Court’s order; [ 46 ] ORDERS that the Director of Youth Protection brings help, advice and support to the child and his parents and to his foster family; [ 47 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A for the carrying out of this order. __________________________________ HERMINA POPESCU, J.C.Q.

Me Louyse Lemieux Paradis, Smith and Lemieux For the applicant Me Isabelle Gagnon For the child Me Alexis Deschênes bureau d’aide juridique For the mother Filed on : August 21, 2019