2013 QCCQ 6808, 2013 QCCQ 6808

Protection de la jeunesse — 131160 2013 QCCQ 6808 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] Youth Division No : 145-41-000391-117 DATE : March 11, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE ROBERT LEVESQUE, j.q.c. ______________________________________________________________________ [Social Worker 1] Petitioner and X Child and A Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUGDMENT [ 1 ] A petition for revision of an order in respect of X (2006[…]) is referred to the Court by the Director of youth protection pursuant to

section 95 of the Youth protection act. [ 2 ] Mrs. A is the mother of X and Y. The father is not legally recognized. [ 3 ] On January 11, 2012 (written reasons filed on January 19), the Court grants a petition for protection concerning the children who are entrusted to their mother with supportive and follow-up measures until January 31, 2013 for the reasons enunciated in the judgment. Psychological evaluations of the mother and the children are also recommended.

They were done. [ 4 ] For the essential, the Court concluded to a situation of neglect (lack of hygiene at home including the children's personal hygiene). [ 5 ] The Court also noticed that X suffers from encopresis and the mother is unable to organize alone the required services. Y presents a speech problem and is followed by a therapist. There were also other problems documented in the reports. [ 6 ] Children's behaviour was also at issue. They have been expelled from a summer camp for many serious reasons (disorganization, unable to follow the rules, hygiene issue, behaviour).

[ 7 ] The petition is based on the following assertions and facts:

a) Last week, the mother have violently grabbed X by the throat, while stating : “do you wanna die”, on several occasions;

b) Y has heard the event while she was in her room;

c) During the previous weeks, the mother has violently pushed Y against a rock which left bruises on her leg;

d) During the same period of time, the mother has violently pushed X on his bed, which left bruises on his hip;

e) The mother is often out or control, yelling at the children, using an inappropriate language;

f) The case is under police investigation. [ 8 ] At the hearing, the mother is present and unrepresented. She contests the petition and asks that the children be returned to her.

They are entrusted provisorely to a foster family. [ 9 ] The children's lawyer, after having heard the evidence, adopts the position of the Director of youth protection that the children must be maintained with a foster family until June 30, 2013. [ 10 ] The Court studied the petitioner's psychosocial report, the report of a paediatrician, psychological evaluations of the mother and the children, the report of an external educator and reports and letters from the school. [ 11 ] The Court also viewed and listened to two DVD containing the children's interview with a police investigator to serve as their testimony. [ 12 ] The Court heard the testimonies of the petitioner, two police officers, a social worker actually working at the CLSC (who intervened previously in this situation for the Director of youth protection) and the mother and his brother. [ 13 ] The evidence reveals that, after the last court order, the situation was improving and the mother was collaborating. [ 14 ] However, during summer of 2012, the situation started to deteriorate and it was very difficult to contact the mother.

Collaboration was decreasing. [ 15 ] Then, on October 5 th , 2012, a "signalement" was retained by the Director of youth protection concerning allegations that X had been subject to physical abuse by his mother. [ 16 ] Both children were removed and they are since in a foster family on a provisory basis. [ 17 ] X consistently disclosed to the teacher, the police and the petitioner that he was grabbed by the neck by his mother to the point that he could not breathe, his mother asking him if he wants to die.

He also affirms that his mother says bad words. [ 18 ] He also disclosed to the teacher that his mother pushed him on the bed and he exhibited a large bruise on his hip. [ 19 ] Y said to the police officer that her mother says bad words. That her mother hits X and she also hits and kicks her because of their behaviour (she says that they are always bad, yelling and screaming). That X would hit her (Y ), kick her, push her and spit at her.

[ 20 ] The mother denies the facts but in a very general and quick fashion. [ 21 ] She claims that X fell on the tub in the bathroom but without specifications. [ 22 ] She says she is pretty easy-going and hard to get mad as it takes her a while. [ 23 ] She says that the allegations do not make sense to her. [ 24 ] Giving a light smile while nervously sneering, she says: " definitely no physical abuse ". [ 25 ] She says she does not understand the allegation of choking X and threatening to kill him as he has no bruise.

She is asking for the evidence. [ 26 ] At the end of her testimony, she questions the fact that the intervener let her alone with her children during the supervised visit at the office even though parents in that situation complain, most of the time, that they are under constant watch. [ 27 ] She alleges that Mrs.[Social worker 1]would have incite her to not contest and to not take a lawyer and that she would buy her a fridge and find her a new apartment. [ 28 ] In cross-examination, she says she is not sure who said that or if it was really said that way as it can be an

interpretation on her part. She declares that she does not know why she brought that up. [ 29 ] In fact, she tries to clumsily throw the problem in the petitioner's yard and it affects her credibility. [ 30 ] She complains not being represented. [ 31 ] She had a lot of time to retain and instruct counsel. The case was even delayed for this reason.

She did not brought up that subject at the outset of the hearing. [ 32 ] According to her, she is a good mother who collaborates with the Director of youth protection and who helps her kids to develop. [ 33 ] She admits swearing but it is not directed to the kids although they might hear. [ 34 ] Her brother's testimony presents an idyllic situation. This testimony is more to accommodate than anything else and is incompatible with the judgment of January 19, 2012 and with the actual evidence. [ 35 ] The Court believes the children.

The testimony of the mother and her brother are not convincing. [ 36 ] Moreover, it is significant that the general state of the children is improving since their placement. [ 37 ] It is also significant that they never came back on their verbalizations as it happened from time to time, especially when the truth is not said at first. [ 38 ] The Court concludes from the whole evidence including the medical reports that the Director of youth protection did prove on a balance of probabilities that the children are subjected and run a risk to be subjected to unreasonable methods of upbringing by their mother who does not take the necessary steps to put an end to the situation as she denies it.

WHEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 39 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of X are still considered to be in danger according to

section 38 of the Youth protection act; [ 40 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted to a foster family; [ 41 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the mother and her children be supervised as long deemed necessary by the Director of youth protection; [ 42 ] ORDERS that the mother be present to medical and specialized services follow-ups concerning her children; [ 43 ] ORDERS that X receives all the services required by his medical health condition and that the recommendations be followed by the foster family and the mother;

[ 44 ] ORDERS that Mrs. A participates actively in all the measures suggested by the Director of youth protection in order to put an end to the situation of endangerment; [ 45 ] ORDERS that Mrs.

A participates actively in all the measures suggested by the Director of youth protection in order to put an end to the situation of endangerment; [ 46 ] ORDERS that a person working for an organism or an establishment provides aid, counsel and assistance to X and his family; [ 47 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of youth protection of the Centre Jeunesse A until June 30, 2013 for the carrying out of the present measures. __________________________________ ROBERT LEVESQUE, J.Q.C. Me Louyse A. Lemieux, for the petitioner Me Florence Frappier-Routhier, for the child Mrs. A the mother