2019 QCCQ 15729, 2019 QCCQ 15729

Protection de la jeunesse — 194989 2019 QCCQ 15729 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [ … ] TOWN OF [ … ] Youth Division No: 635-41-000766-177 DATE: January 16, 2019 (written judgment rendered on June 17, 2019) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [ … ] , 2016 [ SOCIAL WORKER 1 ] , Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in Town A, district A Applicant and A, residing and domiciled [ … ] , district A Mother and B , residing and domiciled House [ … ] , district A 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 revise a decision rendered on April 17, 2018, regarding the child X, born on [ … ] , 2016. At that date the Court declared the security and development still in danger and ordered that the child remain with the parents with aid, counsel and assistance until January 31, 2019. [ 2 ] The DYP submits that the situation allows to keep the child with his parents with aid, counsel and assistance until October 31, 2019.

Position of the parties [ 3 ] The mother is pregnant and wait all day on January 15, for the file to proceed as scheduled, but the hearing had to be postponed on January 16, because of the lack of time. As she was too tired, she gave mandate to Me Lazarov to act in her absence. She admits most of the allegations, and she agrees with the measures. [ 4 ] The father is absent, but represented by Me Martineau. He admits some of the allegations and he agrees with the measures. [ 5 ] The child who is two years old is absent, but represented by Me Tommasel.

Historical situation [ 6 ] On April 20, 2017 , the situation of the child was submitted to the Court. The evidence showed that the mother used unreasonable educational methods with the child and his older sister. At the hearing the mother was very emotional. She had recently reduced her alcohol consumption, and because of that the conjugal violence in the household also diminished. The father also admits his regular alcohol and drug consumption and his violent gestures toward the mother. The older sister already bit him to protect her mother.

The Court declared the security and development of the child in danger [1] and entrusted him to her mother until April 20, 2018. [ 7 ] On April 17, 2018 , the situation of X was revised. The relation between the parents remained conflictual. The mother reduced her alcohol consumption and offered a good collaboration with the DYP. The father required help from the community to cope with his addiction. The relation between the mother and the older sister was very tense. The situation of the child remained stable despite the parents’ personal issues. The Court maintained the child with his parents.

Facts [ 8 ] The parents still consume once or twice a week. The mother met with the addiction counsellor, but she is now pregnant and sober, so she stopped, but she recently relapses.

[ 9 ] Some violent events occurred again between the parents since the last order. After the last event, when the mother threatened to kill the child, she accepted to start again the anger management she started before. [ 10 ] On two occasions in November 2018, the mother and her spouse went to Town B in a way to go to [region A] to visit Y, their oldest daughter who was in therapy there. They consume at the hotel for two days in a row and left the child alone at the hotel. [ 11 ] After the last event, X was entrusted to family members upon his comeback in Town A.

A safety plan was put in place with the parents’ collaboration, who engaged themselves not to consume and to receive a close follow-up. The father accepted to receive the services, which is an important step forward from his side. [ 12 ] Thanks to the safety net and the measures in place, the events of consumption occur mostly in Town B where there is less supervision and more temptation. The DYP worker is agree that the child remain with his parents as long as they continue to receive the services and apply the counsels. She told them that it’s the last chance they have to resolve their issues.

She knows that they are able to achieve that. Analysis [ 13 ] The child’s situation, because of the parents’ habits, remains fragile and still requires the supervision from the DYP. [ 14 ] The consumption of the mother seems to be contextual and mostly occur in Town B, but she has to continue to improve her situation anywhere she is for her well-being and the best interest of her children. [ 15 ] The recommended measures are in his best interest and appropriate to put an end to the situation.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 16 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 17 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child X, born on [ … ] , 2016, are still in danger; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the child remain with the parents; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court, especially that they address the issues concerning domestic violence, anger management and alcohol consumption; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the parents periodically report to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in the child regard to put an end to the compromising situation; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the child receive specific health care and services required by his situation; [ 22 ] ORDERS that parents remain sober in the presence of the child and refrain from any kind of violence; [ 23 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents seek help through the Social Services concerning their alcohol consumption, anger management and conflictual relationship; [ 24 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and the family; [ 25 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X , to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 26 ] THE WHOLE until October 31, 2019. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Geneviève Apollon, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Angèle Tommasel, attorney for the child Me Ivan Lazarov, attorney for the mother Me Isabelle Martineau, attorney for the father Date of hearing: January 16, 2019