2017 QCCQ 16621, 2017 QCCQ 16621

Protection de la jeunesse — 176342 2017 QCCQ 16621 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 105-41-000392-150 DATE: July 3, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JANICK POIRIER, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant and X born on [...], 2008 Child and A and B Parents/Defendants ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] In August 2016, the Court entrusts the family's three children to their parents and orders a follow-up. [ 2 ] The Court is seized with an application for revision and extension of that previous judgment, in order to entrust the children solely to the mother. [ 3 ] The evidence reveals that the family situation worsens over the last months, although the children have been exposed to domestic violence for a long time.

Verbal violence between parents is recurrent and escalating. [ 4 ] The mother has a hard time applying structure and discipline at home, while the father is of very little help. The father spends most of his time playing videogames. Moreover, he yells and screams a lot. He insults the mother in the presence of their children and also calls them names. [ 5 ] The father does not involve himself in a follow-up in relation with his violence and anger-management issues. He admits his yelling and swearing but does not demonstrate the real intention to change his attitude.

The father does not see the impact of his behaviour on the children. Despite his lack of involvement, he says he is doing his best. [ 6 ] Last May, a troubling incident takes place at home. The father grabs his daughter by the arm and pushes her against the refrigerator, while his two sons are also present. The father has to leave the house afterwards and is prohibited to have contacts with his daughter. [ 7 ] Since then, the mother takes care of the children on her own and the situation improves.

The youngest child was frequently absent from school, but he attends school every day since his father left home. [ 8 ] The mother says it is now easier for her to put a routine in place at home. The youngest child, who has behaviour issues, shows a more appropriate attitude than he used to. The mother states that her children now listen to her and are respectful. Obviously, the family environment is calmer and less stressful. [ 9 ] The mother intends to cooperate with professionals in order to be able to keep her children with her.

[ 10 ] There is still a lot of work to accomplish. [ 11 ] The father does not request contacts with his sons, neither does he collaborate with the director of youth protection. He attends the hearing but, apparently unhappy with what he hears, he chooses to leave the court room. [ 12 ] The evidence convinces the Court that the application is well founded. The measures recommended by the director of youth protection, to which the mother and children's counsel agree, appear to be in the best interest of the children.

WHEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 13 ] GRANTS the application for revision and extension of order; [ 14 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still considered to be in danger according to

section 38 of the youth protection act ; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to his mother, at the exclusion of the father, until December 31, 2017; [ 16 ] ORDERS that contacts between the child and his father are determined following agreement between the parties and AUTHORIZES the director of youth protection to supervise them; [ 17 ] ORDERS that the child and his parents benefit from external educator services; [ 18 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother have personal follow-up to stabilise her situation; [ 19 ] RECOMMENDS that the father undertake personal follow-up concerning his violence issues; [ 20 ] FORBIDS the parents to use or demonstrate any violence in presence of the child; [ 21 ] FORBIDS both parents to denigrate each other in the presence of the child; [ 22 ] FORBIDS both parents to use their child as messenger; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the parents actively participate in the measures ordered to put an end to the situation; [ 24 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide aid, counsels and assistance to the child and his family until December 31, 2017; [ 25 ] 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 the judgment. __________________________________ JANICK POIRIER, J.C.Q.

Me Louyse A. Lemieux for the applicant Me Alexis Deschênes for the child Me Cédric Leblanc Falardeau for the mother Mr. B

the father Written judgment filed on July 13, 2017