2017 QCCQ 16008, 2017 QCCQ 16008

Protection de la jeunesse — 176663 2017 QCCQ 16008 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] “Youth Division” N° : 525-41-031905-169 DATE : September 19, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE FRANÇOIS STE-MARIE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION and X Born on [...], 2011 child and A mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT

Section 91 of the Youth Protection Act (R.S.Q. c. P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ Warning : The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcast of information allowing a child or the child’s parents to be identified. Every person who contravenes this provision is liable to a fine (sections 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] In accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act , the Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for the decision rendered from the bench at the hearing held on September 19, 2017. [ 2 ] On May 5, 2017, the Tribunal declared that the security or development of the child was endangered under sections 38 b) 1 o i, b) 1 o iii and b) 2 o of the Youth Protection Act . [ 3 ] The hearing on the applicable measures was set for September 19, 2017. [ 4 ] Today the Director recommends that the child remains in a foster home and that support measures be ordered for a period of nine months. [ 5 ] The mother is asking for an immediate return of the child to her care.

Subsidiarily, the mother is asking for the child’s progressive reintegration or a greater access to him. [ 6 ] The child’s lawyer is in agreement with the Director’s proposed plan but is recommending a shorter placement order (6 months). Question in litigation [ 7 ] Is it possible to entrust the child to his mother’s care? If not, what should be the placement’s duration? Context and Analysis [ 8 ] The child and his brother have continued to thrive in the foster family of Mrs. B. They have adapted well to her clear and consistent routine. [ 9 ] X successfully completed Kindergarten at the A School for the Deaf.

He attended two separate day camps over the past summer. [ 10 ] Adam continues to attend Garderie A.

[ 11 ] Both children requested extensive dental interventions. They were both seen by their pediatrician for complete physical examinations. [ 12 ] On June 2, 2017, the Director received a signalement to the effect that the child and his brother had been victim of sexual abuse by their brother Moshe. Following the evaluation, the Director concluded that Moshe had touched the boys’ genitals on at least one occasion. Moshe himself admitted to this. The Director recognizes that the mother has taken all the necessary step to put an end to this situation.

She agreed for the child to receive support in relation to the abuse. Consequently, the Tribunal will not add this rationale to the child’s situation of compromission. [ 13 ] The mother entered a drug rehabilitation centre in Florida but left the 30 day Program before its completion (following 9 days). She reports that she did not relate. [ 14 ] The mother states that she attends 12-Steps support meetings but she is unable to provide any written confirmation. [ 15 ] She has been more transparent with the youth protection worker.

She reports that she last gambled and used cocaine following the Court hearing in May 2017. She reports consuming marijuana on a regular basis. [ 16 ] The mother reports that, since her children’s placement in January 2017, she had eight different jobs. Since that time, she also moved on three different occasions. [ 17 ] The mother had weekly supervised visits with the children. Approximately one out of four visits were cancelled by the mother. She has not consistently called the children.

The youth protection worker has to continue working with her around not making promises that she cannot fulfill. [ 18 ] The youth protection worker clarified the Director’s intentions regarding the visitation plan between the mother and the child. The Director is open to provide unsupervised and longer visits, but the mother needs to show consistency. The mother can also attend the child’s medical and dental appointments. To this day, she never went to these appointments. [ 19 ] The mother has good intentions, but she needs to follow through.

The youth protection worker noted that the mother was registered in a parenting class, but that she missed the first class. The mother states her agreement to do a parental capacity assessment, to start a therapeutic process and to submit to an ADHD assessment. [ 20 ] At this point, the child and his brother are thriving in a stable environment. Before considering any reintegration of the child to her care, the mother first needs to focus on herself. She needs to stabilize her own situation. She needs to be consistent in her contacts and follow through with the different support measures.

She needs to continue collaborating truthfully and with transparency with the Director. This process will take time. Consequently, the placement’s duration suggested by the Director meets the child’s needs and best interests. THEREFORE AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 21 ] ORDERS that the child remain entrusted to a foster family; [ 22 ] TAKES ACT of the Director of Youth Protection’s intention to leave the child in the foster family of Mrs.

B; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the child and his mother be determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 24 ] TAKES ACT of the Director of Youth Protection’s plan to augment in frequency, duration and to change the supervision when the situation will allow; [ 25 ] PROHIBITS any contact between the child and Mr.

C; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the child and his brother Moshe be determined by the Director of Youth Protection, including supervision if needed; [ 27 ] TAKES ACT of the mother’s agreement to undergo random drug testing and consequently, ORDERS that the mother undergo random drug testing at the request of the worker; [ 28 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the mother participate in a therapeutic process to address her addictions (ie. drugs and gambling) and take steps to ameliorate her parenting practices by participating in a parenting program; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the medical and health needs of the child be met in a timely manner, including any issue with regards to X’s cochlear implant; [ 30 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the mother follow through on the recommendations stemming from the parental capacity assessment dated August 27, 2015 by Dr.

Cloutier (i.e. that she be assessed for a possible ADHD disorder, that she work with an educator, that she pursue individual therapy); [ 31 ] ORDERS that the mother continue to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection and meet with the worker when requested; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the Director of Youth Protection be authorized to exchange pertinent information with any professionals treating the family; [ 33 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the child and the family for a period of nine months;

[ 34 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ François Ste-Marie, J.C.Q. Signed on October 3, 2017 /cd Mtre Isabelle Loranger Counsel for the Director of Youth Protection Mtre Marie-Josée Ayoub Counsel for the child Mtre Josée Lefebvre Counsel for the mother Date of hearing: September 19, 2017