2020 QCCQ 12757, 2020 QCCQ 12757

Protection de la jeunesse — 209326 2020 QCCQ 12757 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] Youth Division No: 635-41-001016-200 DATE: March 17, 2020 (written judgment rendered on May 19, 2020) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2017 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] and [SOCIAL WORKER 2], Youth Protection workers, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., working in Town A, district A (Quebec) Applicants and A, confidential Mother and B, residing and domiciled at […] in Town A, district A (Quebec) Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 38 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 declare that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2017, are endangered under

section 38 (c), (e) (2) [1] , of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The DYP asks that the children remain with the mother until January 31, 2021. Position of the parties [ 3 ] The mother is absent, but represented by Me Boumeftah. She recognizes that the security and development of her child are in danger and she agrees with the measures and specifies that the child is safe with her. [ 4 ] The father is present and represented by Me Laoun.

He recognizes that the security and development of his child are in danger and he agrees with the measures, but he considers that a delay of six months should be enough. [ 5 ] The child X is present and represented by Me Sinnett. On her client’s behalf, she submits that his security and development are endangered for the reason alleged by the DYP and that the measures are in his best interest. [ 6 ] X has a sister, Y who is 13 months old. The Court is also seized with her situation.

Facts [ 7 ] On August 17, 2018, the DYP received a report for the child X regarding: - 38 (c) : exposure to conjugal violence from the father; - 38 (b) (2): risk of neglect because of substance abuse from the father; - 38 (b) (1) iii.: inappropriate parental attitudes. [ 8 ] On April 10, 2019, the DYP concluded that the facts were founded and the security and development endangered under

section 38 (

c) psychological ill-treatment. The same date, the parents signed a voluntary measure. The children were maintained at their parents place and the parents committed themselves to refrain from using violence in the presence of their children. [ 9 ] The delay between the report and the conclusion of the report was due to the fact that no worker was available at that time to evaluate the report. The facts were considered as not urgent and not too frequent, so the file was put on a waiting list until the last event

of November 30, 2019. Also, according to the DYP worker, the children were not at risk because, despite the facts that the report was not concluded and no voluntary measures were suggested, the DYP offered a follow-up to the family on a monthly basis. [ 10 ] On January 14, 2020, a violent event of conjugal violence occurred. While being assaulted by the father, the mother took the baby in her arm to protect herself, hoping that the father would stop, but the mother and the baby were injured. The mother and the two children were brought to the hospital. The injuries were minor.

An immediate protective measure was taken, and the mother moved to a confidential address. At that time, the father was heavily intoxicated by alcohol and displayed suicidal ideation. [ 11 ] This event was not the only one since the signature of the voluntary measure. Indeed, the DYP was made aware of an event in September 2019, and in December 2019. Even if the mother went few days in a woman's shelter, the father put pressure on her to come back home. [ 12 ] On January 27, 2020, the Court was seized and rendered a provisional order.

The children remained entrusted under the care of their mother, and the contacts with the father were supervised by the DYP. [ 13 ] X is a smiling child. He appears comfortable with both his parents. He stays most of the time with his mother, but sometimes he attends daycare. Despite the event of January 14, during the supervised contacts the father exercises, X was still comfortable and played with his father who showed him affection. [ 14 ] Since the event, the mother is taking care of her children alone and she is doing very well. She is very organized.

Unfortunately, she has some personal issues, such as feeling of depression, symptoms of withdrawal of cannabis because she consumed every day before, but not at all since January 14. She also admits having a gambling problem. That being said, despite the pressure she had from the father, by the past, to stay at home, her desire to totally cut the contact with him increases more and more. She received help to obtain new IDs and to open her personal bank account. [ 15 ] The mother is collaborating very well with the service. She is always on time, and she is open to speak about her situation.

The father accepts the intervention of the DYP in his life and understands more the suggested measures. Few weeks ago, he considered that the mother and the children should be at home with him. Today, he accepts the facts that the mother will not come back home with the children. He expresses that he is healing more and more and hopes to be able to resume the care of his children shortly.

The father always mentioned that it is important for him to have access to his children, but he had to cancel some contacts because of his work. [ 16 ] For the father, it is very difficult to see so many changes of DYP worker and for him it is difficult to develop a link with those workers. The father is working on heavy equipment truck driver. He consumes alcohol around twice a week and even if by the past he refuses to seek help for his consumption issue, he recognizes today that he would need it. But for him, considering his work schedule, the access to the Social Services is difficult.

He is conscious that he could become violent while intoxicated. Waiting from professional services, he receives the support from his relatives who help him to deal with his issues and his aggressiveness by reconnecting with his culture. Analysis [ 17 ] The evidence provided clearly shows that the situation of the child is endangered because of the psychological ill-treatment he suffers from and the serious risk for him to be a victim of physical abuse. [ 18 ] The measures are not contested except regarding the duration.

Those measures and the duration are in the best interest of the children. [ 19 ] The father has to address his issues and even if he is motivated to change the situation, this change cannot be done in a short delay. He needs to involve himself in those changes and to put all his energy. He also needs to seek the appropriate help through the professional and/or relatives. He also has to understand that according to the mother’s desire, the family will not be reunited and he will have to live with this new reality.

The father has to respect the desire expressed by the mother. [ 20 ] Also, the children were witnessing many episodes of conjugal violence. Now, they need to develop in an environment free of violence and to be protected against the trauma caused by the consumption and that violence. [ 21 ] Since the separation, the mother took her responsibilities and takes very good care of the children. She also collaborates very well and she is conscious about her personal issues which she plans to address.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 22 ] GRANTS the application; [ 23 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2017, are endangered according to

section 38 (

c) and (e) (2) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the children remain with their mother; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the mother’s address remain confidential; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the parents periodically report to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in their children regard to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the children are endangered; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the parents remain sober and without any form of violent behaviour in the presence of the children;

[ 29 ] RECOMMENDS that the father seek help through the Social Services or another resource deemed appropriate regarding substance abuse, personal issues and anger management; [ 30 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother seek help through the Social Services or another resource deemed appropriate regarding relationship issues and emotional dependency; [ 31 ] 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; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the modality, frequency and degree of supervision of the contacts between the children and the father be determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 33 ] INVITES the father to benefit from those accesses; [ 34 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to perform unannounced visits at the father’s residence when the children are present; [ 35 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling and assistance to the children and their family; [ 36 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X , to the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 37 ] THE WHOLE , until January 31, 2021. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Geneviève Apollon, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Kelly Ann Sinnet, attorney for the child Me Nada Boumeftah, attorney for the mother Me Eve Laoun, attorney for the father Dates of hearing: March 16 and 17, 2020