2022 QCCQ 14331, 2022 QCCQ 14331

Protection de la jeunesse — 228995 2022 QCCQ 14331 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] TOWN OF […] Youth Division No: 635-41-000716-164 DATE: November 28, 2022 (written decision only) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on […], 2006 [Social worker 1], Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [City A], district of […] (Quebec) Applicant and C Mother and D Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 (DYP) asks the Court to review a decision rendered on December 8, 2020, regarding the adolescent X, born on […], 2006. At that date the Court declared the security and development still endangered and ordered that the adolescent remain entrusted to Mr. E, until September 30, 2021. [ 2 ] The DYP submits that the situation allows to return X to his mother and asks that the adolescent be entrusted to her. [ 3 ] X has siblings, Y, Z, A and B.

The Court is also seized with their situation. Position of the parties [ 4 ] The mother is present and represented by Me Ève Laoun. She recognizes that the security and development of her child are still endangered, and she agrees with the measures. [ 5 ] The father was mostly present but missed some days of the hearing. He is represented by Me Nada Boumeftah. He recognizes that the security and development of his child are still endangered, and he has the same position as the mother. [ 6 ] The youth is present and represented by Me Kelly Ann Sinnett and by Me Jean-Bernard Terrisse.

He recognizes that his security and development are still endangered and he agrees with the measures. History of the situation [ 7 ] On August 18, 2016 , the Court was seized with an application for protection. The parents had alcohol consumption and conjugal violence issues. The children expressed fearing their father. The mother agreed to collaborate with the DYP. After being reluctant, the father also finally accepted to collaborate.

The Court declared that the security and development of the children were endangered and maintained them with their mother with different measures, the whole until February 28, 2017. [ 8 ] On March 2, 2017 , the Court revised the situation. The youth remained with his parents. He was doing well but he missed some days of school. The mother did not seek help, but she did well. The father sought help and stopped drinking. Both parents recognized still needing help from the DYP. The Court maintained the child with his parents until August 18, 2017.

This measure was maintained until December 18, 2017, under provisional measures. [ 9 ] On December 18, 2017 , the Court revised the situation. The child had remained under his parents’ care. The report from the school showed a lot of behavioural issues (bullying, disrespect, skip, out of bounds). The Court maintained the child with his parents, ordered that he attend school daily and ordered that the family receive the service of an external educator, the whole until August 31, 2018.

[ 10 ] On September 4, 2018 , the evidence showed that the parents made great changes in their way of life. They stopped drinking and installed a healthy routine for their children. The parents are very proud of their changes. X attended school regularly. Even if the school maintained the opinion that X bullied his peers, the evidence is not clear and could make us think that X would be instead a victim of bullying.

The Court maintained the child with his parents until June 7, 2019. [ 11 ] On June 13, 2019 , the evidence revealed that the father was detained shortly after the last decision and the mother was hospitalized. Doing so, the child mostly resided with his maternal grandmother. He did better at school but continued to have some behavioural issues. After being released, the father took back the responsibility of his children and he did very well. The mother came back with her newborn after a long hospitalization. The family was reunited after a long separation and was also grieving after few relatives’ death.

The parents continued to collaborate very well and remained sober. The Court maintained the child with his parents until December 31, 2019. [ 12 ] On January 28, 2020 , the Court revised the situation. In July 2019, the father assaulted the mother, and the 2 youngest children were injured. In October 2019, the mother moved to [City B] with X, Z and A. Y and B were cared for by their maternal grandmother and her ex-boyfriend, Mr E and finally only by Mr E due to the grandmother’s alcohol consumption. The father was detained from July to November 2019.

After his release, he took care of Y, B and A (brought him back from [City B]), but he continued to consume alcohol daily. The baby A was neglected by the father regarding his health needs. In December 2019, the father left for [City B] with the 3 children and few days later, the DYP was informed that the parents consumed alcohol, cannabis and cocaine on a daily basis, and they got into fights. As of January 6, 2020, all the children were entrusted to a foster family under provisional measures.

The Court entrusted the youth to Mr E, the whole until October 31, 2020. [ 13 ] On December 8, 2020 , the Court revised again the situation. Since the last decision, X remained with Mr E. Y and B were together in a foster home in [City B] and A and Z were also together in another foster family in [City B]. The parents came back living up North. They recognized not being able to resume the care of their children but wanted that the 4 youngest be entrusted to a foster family in [City A].

The Court reminded that the children were entrusted in [City B] because the parents were there and did not have the intention to come back up North. Doing so, the contacts were facilitated. When the parents came back in [City A] in June 2020, the children were already entrusted for 6 months. The Court insisted on the importance to regularly assess the possibility to entrust Native children close to their community according to the federal law. The Court entrusted X to Mr E, and the 4 youngest to their current foster family.

The Court ordered the DYP to take the necessary steps to find a foster family in [City A] for the children. Facts 1- The mother's situation [ 14 ] The mother continued to live in [City A]. [ 15 ] She took steps to attend [Organism A] a first time but had to renounce because she did not want to be at the same time of another specific person. She attended another session and succeeded in July 2021. [ 16 ] The [Organism A] worker testifies about the mother's motivation and involvement in the process.

She participates to the pre- care and post-care follow-up and communicates minimally once a week with the addiction worker to have support. [ 17 ] She is not totally sober, but she does not consume at her place. X is living with her, and she does not want him seeing her intoxicated. She is also able to protect B and Y who visit her everyday. If she is intoxicated, she tells them not to come. [ 18 ] Her efforts to maintain her sobriety make her to be more isolated but she accepts that. She does it for her and for her children.

She sews to occupy her free time and she loves that. [ 19 ] The DYP worker recognized the efforts made by the mother by attending a treatment center, but she considers that the mother did not demonstrate yet that she can maintain her efforts on a long period of time. [ 20 ] Concerns were raised about the conflictual relationship that she has with the father. The mother asserts that she feels stronger now, and she considers her able to set her limits.

The house is under her name, and she will not hesitate to ask him to leave if he consumes or does not respect her. [ 21 ] The mother admits some relapses since she left [Organism A] but the evidence shown that she is much more in control of her consumption. [ 22 ] In December 2021, the Court was seized with an application for provisional measures due to X's behavioural issues. The DYP asked that the adolescent be entrusted to a rehabilitation center.

After hearing the evidence, the Court maintained the adolescent under his mother's care with strict conditions. [ 23 ] At the continuation of the hearing, the Court heard the evidence that those conditions were respected and the DYP did not ask anymore for a placement in rehabilitation center. 2- The father's situation [ 24 ] The father does not collaborate with the DYP and his exact situation is unknown. [ 25 ] He lives few months in [City B].

He attended some days of the hearing while he stopped in [City C] on his travelling between [City B] and [City A], but when it was his turn to testify, he refused to come at the Court House even if he was in the same village. [ 26 ] The other information that the DYP obtained are the following: he had been detained for a while since the last order, he lost his job and he had been evicted from his apartment in [City B].

[ 27 ] The DYP would like to meet with him to know more about his situation, but he is difficult to be reached. 3- X's situation [ 28 ] The DYP filed a first application for revision, and in December 2021, filed a modified one due to new events.

The parties made the admissions, and the Court concludes that the following allegations had been proven: - The adolescent is not attending school regularly, - The adolescent was arrested for driving under the influence and at another moment for driving at high speed, - Despite his placement, the adolescent was staying with his mother, - The adolescent does not collaborate with the DYP worker, - On October 15, 2021, he was again arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. He crashed the pick-up he was driving while his mother was in the vehicule.

The mother was medivaced to [City B]. - During the mother's hospitalization, the adolescent was left alone. [ 29 ] As mentioned earlier, on December 10, 2021, the Court was seized with an application for provisional measures and the DYP requested that the adolescent be entrusted to a rehabilitation center. [ 30 ] Despite those difficulties, the evidence shows that the mother can support her son with the school and encourage him to go. He confirms that he is interested to go, but he would like to keep his part time job and to continue to hunt. He provides a lot for his family.

The DYP worker describes him as "an adult in an adolescent body". [ 31 ] X admits the event of consumption but explain that it is not a habit for him, and the evidence confirms that it was an isolated event. He consumed following the death of his cousin. Analysis [ 32 ] As admitted by the parents, the situation of the adolescent continues to be endangered. [ 33 ] The measures are not contested, and the evidence shows that it is in his best interest to stay with his mother with who he has a very strong bond. They support each other. He is the man in the house, and he is very proud of that.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 34 ] GRANTS the application; [ 35 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the X, born on […], 2006, are still endangered; [ 36 ] MAINTAINS the adolescent to his mother; [ 37 ] ORDERS that the adolescent attend school or another place of learning or participate in a program, geared to developing skills and autonomy; [ 38 ] ORDERS that the parents report in person, at regular intervals, to the Director of Youth Protection to inform the organisation of their current situation; [ 39 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and the parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the tribunal; [ 40 ] ORDERS that the adolescent refrain from alcohol and drug consumption; [ 41 ] ORDERS that the parents do not expose the youth to alcohol consumption or any kind of violence; [ 42 ] RECOMMENDS the mother seek help through the Social Services or another resource deemed appropriate for her alcohol consumption issues; [ 43 ] RECOMMENDS that the father seek help through the Social Services or another resource deemed appropriate for his alcohol consumption, violence and personal issues; [ 44 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to access the information regarding the parents’ presence at appointments with professionals and their level of involvement with the services provided; [ 45 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and the mother receive assistance from an external educator for the period deemed necessary by the professional; [ 46 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling or assistance to the adolescent and the adolescent’s parents until March 31, 2023; [ 47 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent, X, to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out.

__________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q. Me Geneviève Apollon attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Kelly-Ann Sinnet and Me Jean-Bernard Terrisse, attorneys for the child Me Ève Laoun, attorney for the mother Me Nada Boumeftah, attorney for the father Date of hearing: September 23, 24 and 29, 2021 November 15 and 23, 2021 December 10, 2021 January 28, 2022,