2022 QCCQ 2153, 2022 QCCQ 2153

Protection de la jeunesse — 221176 2022 QCCQ 2153 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-0 38942-215 Date: March 29, 2022 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on [...], 2006 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A Applicant -and- A , the mother -and- B , the father The parents JUDGMENT

Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act (L.R.Q., c. P-34.1 ) 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 of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A filed an Application to declare that the security or development of a child is in danger in the case of X , a fifteen year-old adolescent, based on the neglect and psychological ill-treatment to which she is exposed. [ 2 ] The Court was also presented with a similar application regarding the adolescent’s sibling whose situation is addressed in a separate judgment. [ 3 ] The facts alleged in support of the amended application dated September 17, 2021 are as follows: 3.1. as background information, the child resides with the mother; 3.2. the mother fails to provide the child with the appropriate supervision or support and fails to take the necessary steps to ensure that the child receives a proper education and attends school as required under the Education Act or any other applicable legislation, more particularly but not restrictively in that:

a) while the child is registered to school, the child hasn’t attended school for almost two (2) years;

b) the mother claimed that the child is doing online school, however the school confirmed that the child is not attending online schooling;

c) the child failed all her classes and will have to repeat the year;

c) Y reported that the mother leaves the children home alone during the night; 3.3. there is a serious risk that the child’s parents are not providing for the child’s basic needs, more particularly but not restrictively in that:

a) there are concerns with the mother’s alcohol and drugs consumption as well as with anger issues;

b) on June 1, 2021, during an unannounced visit, the mother became really aggressive with the social worker in front of the children, blocked her from leaving the home and police intervention was required;

c) during said visit, on a phone call with her friend, the mother made plans, which included drugs and alcohol;

d) in January 2021, the mother was intoxicated and became aggressive towards the grandmother and the children and was throwing objects on the floor;

e) police intervention was required, and the mother was arrested given that she was already breaching her criminal conditions, namely violating her curfew; 3.4. ongoing support and monitoring are required (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 4 ] In light of the foregoing, the Director recommends that the adolescent be entrusted to her mother with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, until November 30, 2022. [ 5 ] The mother, assisted by Me Shapiro Knight, admits the situation of endangerment and consents to the proposed measures.

However, she feels the recommended duration is too long and that the Director of Youth Protection’s involvement should not extend beyond the end of the current school year. [ 6 ] The father is absent and his whereabouts are unknown. He has not been involved in the adolescent’s life and has not had any recent contact with her.

Under the circumstances, the Court proceeded in the father’s absence. [ 7 ] The adolescent, assisted by Me Sureau, agreed with her mother’s position. [ 8 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-1 to D-7 as evidence: D-1: Previous judgments from the Court of Quebec, Youth Division, regarding the child and sibling, filed en-liasse; D-2: Child’s birth certificate; D-3: Court Report, written by [Social Worker 2], dated November 8, 2021; D-4: Police Report, number [...]; D-5: Correspondance from the child X’s school, filed en-liasse; D-6: Attendance records for the child, X, from [School A], en-liasse; D-7: Addendum, written By [Social Worker 1], dated February 25, 2022. [ 9 ] In

summary, the situation of endangerment is admitted and the recommended measures are agreed upon. [ 10 ] The only issue in dispute is the proposed duration of the order. [ 11 ] The Director of Youth Protection argues that the children have missed almost two years of school and have only begun attending school regularly in October 2021, following intense pressure from the Director of Youth Protection as well as Court orders. [ 12 ] In addition, the family’s difficulties are longstanding and recurrent and there has been extensive prior Director of Youth Protection involvement. [ 13 ] The mother, on the other hand, feels that school attendance is no longer an issue and that an order beyond the end of the school year would be excessive. [ 14 ] Having considered all the evidence, I conclude that the Director of Youth Protection’s involvement until November 30, 2022 is fully warranted. [ 15 ] The Director of Youth Protection’s concerns about ensuring the children’s attendance at school for the next academic year are completely justified given the length of time during which the mother neglected to ensure their attendance, despite repeated efforts by school authorities to address the situation: Both schools also made countless calls, left many messages and sent letters to Ms.

A and again there was no response. [School B] and [School A] reported that there were no requests made to the Ministry of Education level for X and Y to be home schooled. Ms.

A failed to ensure that the children attend school as required under the Education Act (chapter 13.3) for a year and a half. [1] [ 16 ] In addition, the issue is not new or circumstantial, and can’t be attributed solely to the pandemic. [ 17 ] As summarized in the Court Report and evidenced by prior judgments [2] , the family experienced similar difficulties from 2015 to 2019: In April 2015, a signalement was received and retained, due to concerns of educational neglect and serious risk of neglect.

The Evaluation/Orientation concluded that the facts were founded and the security and development of X and Z were compromised under Sections 38B1iii and 38B2 of the YPA. The file was closed after receiving Youth Protection Services in Application of Measures in June 2019 as the goals and objectives of the intervention had been met. [3] [ 18 ] Moreover, despite recent Court orders, the mother still failed to comply: On September 20 th 2021, Honourable Judge Jacques Nadeau ordered Ms. A to ensure the children go to school regularly. Ms. A did not respect Honourable Judge Jacques Nadeau court order. Ms.

A made excuses that the children were sick but she was unable to provide Ms. [Social Worker 1] with a medical note. As well, when she did take the children for a COVID-19 test the children tested negative.

Ms. A explained to Ms. [Social Worker 1] that she wishes her children had COVID-19 so they miss 2 weeks of school. The DYP had to petition court a second time for Ms.

A to send the children to school. [4] [ 19 ] Finally, other risk factors also need to be addressed to ensure that the children are not exposed to the mother’s aggressive, erratic behavior while intoxicated as described in the Police Report from January 2021 [5] . [ 20 ] Consequently, the Court is satisfied that the application is well-founded, that the measures are in the adolescent's interest, and that the proposed length of the order is appropriate.

THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 21 ] GRANTS the application; [ 22 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the adolescent, X , are in danger under sections 38 (b) (1) (iii) and 38 (

c) of the Youth Protection Act ; AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE ADOLESCENT 'S INTEREST TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 23 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to her mother; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the adolescent attend school regularly; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the adolescent attends school regularly; [ 26 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother attend and engage in support/therapy services; [ 27 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother does not consume any alcohol in her daughter’s presence; [ 28 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother participate in a program for substance abuse (e.g. [Center A] or [Center B]); [ 29 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother attend services for anger management; [ 30 ] ORDERS that a person working for the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and her family; [ 31 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent, X , to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A , who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 32 ] THE WHOLE until November 30, 2022.

Signed on March 29, 2022 TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. Me Heidi Lechter Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Maïa Sureau Attorney for the adolescent Me Judith Ann Shapiro Knight Attorney for the mother TD/vl