2022 QCCQ 8850, 2022 QCCQ 8850

Protection de la jeunesse — 225907 2022 QCCQ 8850 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-0 40087-223 Date: October 12, 2022 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on [...], 2008 [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 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Court hereby confirms and provides written reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of October 12, 2022, in accordance with the provisions of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act [1] . [ 2 ] 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 fourteen year-old adolescent, based on the psychological ill-treatment to which he is exposed as well as his serious behavioural disturbances. [ 3 ] The facts alleged in support of the amended application dated July 7, 2022 are as follows: 3.1. as relevant information, the child’s half sister and brother are currently followed by the Director of Youth Protection , at the evaluation stage; 3.2. prior to his placement, the child was living with his father and stepmother full-time; 3.3. the child has no relationship with his mother; 3.4. the mother is completely unreachable and her whereabouts are unknown; 3.5. the child has serious behavioral disturbances and the parents fail to take the necessary steps to put an end to the situation, more particularly but not restrictively in that:

a) the child smokes marijuana on a daily basis;

b) concerns exist regarding the child using other types of drugs;

c) the child skips school regularly;

d) the child often steals marijuana, beer, cigarettes and money from the father;

e) on June 8, 2022, the child left home around 12 a.m. to go to his girlfriend’s house, without the father’s consent;

f) the child is also threatening to run away;

g) the father has difficulty management the child’s behaviors and agrees for him to be placed at this time; 3.6. the child runs a serious risk of being subjected to unreasonable methods of upbringing by his father and his stepmother, and the child’s parents fail to take the necessary steps to put an end to the situation, more particularly but not restrictively in that:

a) the child’s half brother is currently under evaluation by the Director of Youth Protection due to physical means of discipline by the child’s stepmother;

b) the child’s half brother was observed with a hand print on his face, due to slapping;

c) the child’s stepmother acknowledged slapping the child’s half brother;

d) a few weeks ago, concerns of physical abuse on the child, by the father, were reported by the school, as the father was seen grabbing the child aggressively by the collar;

e) the youth protection delegate as well as the school staff reported that the father is also verbally aggressive;

f) the child has a conflictual relationship with the father and there is a lot tension between them;

g) the father often screams loudly at the child;

h) the child’s stepmother reported that she is concerned the situation between the child and the father will escalate and become violent;

i) concerns exit in regards to the father and the stepmother’s lack of appropriate knowledge on how to properly discipline the child; 3.7. on June 15, 2022, in the afternoon, immediate protective measures were invoked and the adolescent was place in a group home ; 3.8. the child is seriously and repeatedly subjected to behaviour on the part of his father that could cause him harm and the child’s parents fail to take the necessary steps to put an end to the situation, more particularly but not restrictively in that :

a) the home environment can be volatile during disagreements ;

b) the father and the adolescent can have a very conflictual relationship ;

c) concerns exist that said conflict can escalate into violence (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 4 ] In light of the foregoing, the Director recommends that the adolescent be entrusted to a rehabilitation center with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, for a period of nine months. [ 5 ] The mother’s whereabouts remain unknown. She has not been involved in the adolescent’s life and he has not had any recent contact with her.

Under the circumstances, the Court proceeded in the mother’s absence. [ 6 ] The father, who chose to proceed without the assistance of legal counsel, denied the adolescent’s alleged behavioral disturbances, admitted psychological ill-treatment, and opposed the adolescent’s entrustment to a rehabilitation center.

The father added that he agrees to benefit from any services that may be offered, but that his son should be with him at home. [ 7 ] The adolescent, assisted by Me Stah, admitted both alleged grounds of endangerment but also opposed the proposed measures and asked to be entrusted to his father. [ 8 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-1 to D-5 as evidence: D-1: Copy of Birth Certificate; D-2: Court Report, prepared by [Social worker 2], dated July 6, 2022; D-3: Psychological Assessment by Reida Real Reyes, dated July 14, 2022, curriculum vitae en liasse (filed under

section 293 C.C.P.); D-4: Father’s criminal conditions; D-5: Addendum, prepared by [Social worker 1], dated September 30, 2022. [ 9 ] In

summary, the evidence establishes that the adolescent’s security and development are endangered for the alleged reasons, based both on his serious behavioral disturbances as well as the psychological ill-treatment to which he has been exposed. [ 10 ] As summarized in the Court Report : The Evaluation has concluded that X displays concerning behaviors that put his security and development at risk. He consumes cannabis regularly and there are reports that he consumes other drugs as well. Both X and Mr. B minimize the concerns of his drug use. X and Mr.

B’s conflict has been escalating recently, causing tension in the home and a strain on their relationship. X misbehaves in school and has missed a significant amount of classes. He has also been suspended on more than one occasion. Mr. B no longer felt capable of maintaining X in the family home; therefore he was placed in a rehabilitation centre. Additionally, Mr. B responds to X’s behavioral issues in a concerning manner. He uses verbal denigration and threats, such as calling X

a “failure” and threatening to place him in a group home. The insults have an effect on X’s self-esteem. [2] [ 11 ] When the adolescent’s placement was first ordered by the Court on June 17, 2022, both the adolescent and his father were in agreement. [ 12 ] The adolescent confirmed his position during his psychological assessment when describing the toxic environment in the home: X says that placement is better for him, because at home it is unhealthy. There are lots of arguments, screaming, swearing, and insulting between him and his father. The fights are for everything.

His father is always complaining. [3] [ 13 ] However, it appears that the situation has since changed considerably. [ 14 ] The evidence establishes that father and son have significantly improved their ability to communicate with one another and that the father is extremely eager to ensure that services are put in place to help his son, given the serious delays experienced while in placement due to staff shortages. [ 15 ] Moreover, the social worker could not justify the recommendation that the duration of the adolescent’s placement be extended for an additional nine months. [ 16 ] Under the circumstances, Given the evidence that communication between father and son has significantly improved, Given that both father and son now want to have the adolescent returned to the father’s care as soon as possible, Given that there is no longer any allegation of risk of physical abuse, Given the delays in providing services to the adolescent while in placement, Given the testimony that his unit is short staffed causing delays in services such as the Family Ties program for anger management, Given the delays in offering psychological counselling services that are still not in place despite the recommendations in the Psychological assessment dated July 2022, Given that the father and his son are not only open to receiving services but are prepared to take steps to find services in the community as quickly as possible, Given that they accept the services of an educator and Given that the adolescent is committed to attending school, the Tribunal concludes that the Director has not established the necessity to extend the placement for an additional nine months. [ 17 ] On the contrary, the evidence persuades the Tribunal that a gradual reintegration of the adolescent to his father's care beginning immediately, as appropriate services are put in place, is in the adolescent's best interest so long as his and his father's undetakings are respected.

THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 18 ] GRANTS the application in part; [ 19 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the adolescent, X , are in danger under sections 38 (

c) and 38 (

f) 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: [ 20 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to a rehabilitation center; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the adolescent's reintegration to his father’s care begin immediately, and be completed at the latest by the Christmas Holidays, under the following conditions: • that the family follow the recommendations in the Psychological Assessment; • that the adolescent attends school without fail; • that the father and adolescent benefit from and collaborate with the services of an educator; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the adolescent and his parents be determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 23 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the adolescent benefit from psychological services; [ 24 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the adolescent benefit from anger management services; [ 25 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the father participate in parenting courses; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the adolescent respect his parents’ authority, house rules and consequences when in their care; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the adolescent benefit from a psychoeducational assessment TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE of both the adolescent and his father’s agreement; [ 28 ] 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 his family; [ 29 ] 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; [ 30 ] THE WHOLE for a period of nine months.

Signed on November 9, 2022 TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. Me Christine Waldvogel Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Lilian Stah Attorney for the adolescent TD/vl