2010 QCCQ 15207, 2010 QCCQ 15207

Protection de la jeunesse — 102222 2010 QCCQ 15207 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth chamber No: 635-41-000314-093 DATE: April 30, 2010 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DANIEL BÉDARD, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 2005 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A working in City A, Quebec, district A Applicant -and- A , residing and domiciled in City B, Quebec, district A Mother -and- B , residing and domiciled in City A, Quebec, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (

Section 95 ( par.1) and 75 , Youth Protection Act, R.S.Q. c. P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ I - INTRODUCTION [ 1 ] The Director demands the review of the decision rendered on October 26, 2009, concerning X, born on […], 2005. [ 2 ] The mother is present and represented. The father, duly served, is absent and not involved in the child's life. II - ISSUE TO RESOLVE [ 3 ] The present file does not raise any litigious issue given the nature of the recommendation, the admissions made by the mother and her consent to the said measures.

III - ANALYSIS OF THE FACTS AND DECISION [ 4 ] On October 26, 2009, the Court declared the security and development of the child in danger and ordered his foster care in a foster family for a period of 6 months. At the time, the child had been submitted to an episode of physical abuse. [ 5 ] Since then, the mother has significantly modified her way of life. She has been sober for the past 6 months, has a part-time job and collaborates with social services. There has been no police intervention in her residence. [ 6 ] She has maintained regular and constant contact with the child.

She has not attended as recommended the treatment offered by Center A, but the Court cannot infer negatively. The situation remains delicate without services to support sobriety. [ 7 ] The social report supports the recommendation made by the social worker to reintegrate the child with his mother. [ 8 ] The evidence convinces the Court that reintegration of the child with his mother is the most appropriate measure. Notwithstanding reintegration, close monitoring of the situation is necessary for the following months in order to avoid any reoccurrence and support the mother. [ 9 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT:

[ 10 ] GRANTS the demand; [ 11 ] MAINTAINS the security and development of the child, in danger; [ 12 ] REVIEWS the decision rendered on October 26, 2009; [ 13 ] ORDERS the following measures in accordance with

section 91 of the Law:

a) maintains the child with the mother;

b) that a person working for an establishment or organism provide aid, counsel and assistance to the mother and the child for a period of six (6) months, starting on April 13, 2010;

c) that the mother participate and collaborate in the measures proposed to correct the situation, namely and for the next six (6) months:

i) prohibition to consume alcohol or drugs, unless under a medical prescription; ii) that she presents herself at social services at least twice a month, as scheduled; iii) that she accepts unannounced visits of the social worker; [ 14 ] ENTRUTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection, for the purpose of executing the measures ordered by the Court. __________________________________ DANIEL BÉDARD, J.C.Q. Me Jean-Claude Latraverse Lawyer for child Me Robert-André Adam Lawyer for the D.Y.P. Me Michel Solomon Lawyer for the mother Date of hearing: April 13, 2010