2021 QCCQ 12557, 2021 QCCQ 12557

Protection de la jeunesse — 214044 2021 QCCQ 12557 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] Youth Division No: 760-41-006315-207 DATE: April 6, 2021 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X , born on […], 2008 Child ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION A Applicant v.

A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] Since 2011, the parents share custody of their daughter in virtue of a Superior Court judgment. [ 2 ] The family dynamic is subject to a persistent separation conflict.

The parents are unable to resolve their issues and co-parent effectively. They recognize that their child is affected by her exposure to this situation. [ 3 ] As of March 2020, the child refuses to return to her father’s home, expressing distress in regards to their relationship. She consistently refuses to resume visitation since that time. [ 4 ] Despite different interventions and services, the situation remains relatively unchanged. [ 5 ] The Director of Youth Protection requests a protection order for 9 months with the objective of accompanying the child and her family in a rehabilitation process.

During this period, the child would remain with her mother while benefitting from contacts with her father on a progressive basis, with accompaniment, respecting her expressed wishes. [ 6 ] The father contests the foundation of the Director’s involvement and considers that shared custody should be resumed.

He states being ready to participate in the other measures, should the Court deem such necessary. [ 7 ] Although the mother subscribes to the evaluation, she considers that the child’s access to her father should be supervised, with the possibility of the withdrawal of supervision following the evolution of the situation. [ 8 ] The child agrees to the intervention.

As for the contacts with her father, she wants to undertake a mediation process through the Director’s services before visitation resumes. [ 9 ] The questions for the Court: • Does the child’s exposure to the parental conflict endanger her security and/or development? • Do the tensions between the child and her father result from a situation of educational neglect? • If the Court determines that a situation of endangerment exists, what measures should be put in place as a remedy, while protecting the child? [ 10 ] After evaluating the evidence, the Court concludes to a situation of endangerment, as evaluated by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 11 ] The period of rehabilitation will focus on the primary issues of establishing a healthy parental dynamic while restoring and

enforcing the father/child relationship. Analysis and decision [ 12 ] Does the child’s exposure to the parental conflict endanger her security and/or development? [ 13 ] The parents admit an ongoing separation conflict and the fact that such impacts their daughter. [ 14 ] There is obviously much history between the parents in relation to their separation and subsequent legal battles.

Focused on the past, they choose to distance themselves from their co-parenting obligations, reasoning that the other bears its responsibility. [ 15 ] Their child therefore bears the brunt of this dysfunctional family dynamic, which has been a part of her life since she was a toddler.

She is keenly aware of the tensions and bad feelings between her parents. [ 16 ] Her father recognized that he can speak negatively about the mother in front of her. [ 17 ] Both devoted parents with good parenting skills, they have been unable and/or unwilling, to put aside their frustrations in order to free their daughter from the increasing burden of her family situation. Their mutual distrust and blame impede any meaningful resolution. [ 18 ] Progressively, the impacts become more apparent on the child, eventually resulting in the Director’s involvement.

More particularly, the Court retains the following elements: • The child struggles with anxiety; • In February 2020, the child is seen in psychiatry in reason of important sadness, distress and self-harm behaviours; • She is diagnosed as having minor depression and adjustment disorder; • Subsequent youth mental health services identify that her distress relates to family difficulties, conflicts between her parents and relationship issues with her father; • The child states that her father doesn’t listen to her and disregards her feelings; • She also mentions that her father can have negative comments as to her mother; • As of March, the child refuses to return to her father’s care; • Since that time, she refuses to resume visitation; • The child benefits from a psychological follow-up; [ 19 ] The father does not understand his daughter’s sudden refusal to see or speak with him as he considers that they have a good relationship.

He repeatedly pressures her to explain her decision and change her mind, resulting only in increasing the impacts on her. [ 20 ] The mother accepts her daughter’s decision, while encouraging her to see her father. [ 21 ] The family undertakes a program to work on communication and parenting through the community program A .

The Director also offers mediation meeting between the child and her father, in view of improving their communication and re-establishing contacts. [ 22 ] The child insists that she wants to renew her relationship with her father, but needs to feel that he listens to her and appreciates her point of view. [ 23 ] The father initially participates in this process but resists making any substantial changes in order to address his daughter’s feelings or her discomfort, remaining focused on his needs and hurt. [ 24 ] He remains staunch in his perceptions of being victimized and devalued as a parent.

Although his daughter explains her feelings and wishes on many occasions (including her testimony), the father maintains his lack of understanding and insists on a resumption of the shared custody. [ 25 ] The Court retains that the persistent parental conflict contributes to the child’s emotional distress and therefore constitutes a situation of psychological ill-treatment endangering her security and development. [ 26 ] Do the tensions between the child and her father result from a situation of educational neglect? [ 27 ] The child repeatedly maintains that important communication difficulties exist with her father.

She feels that she cannot express herself freely and that he doesn’t listen to her. [ 28 ] As a child dealing with the issues of upcoming adolescence, anxiety and a complex family dynamic, she asks that her father be more understanding, accept her feelings and not dwell on the past. [ 29 ] While her father is well-intentioned, he is rigid in his principles and the exercise of his parental role.

His actions and reactions are frequently more congruent to these than his daughter’s needs. [ 30 ] This situation, also within the context of the parental conflict, contributes to her eventual choice of living with her mother and

ceasing contacts with her father.

Since the Director’s involvement, she maintains her position despite enormous pressures, which further anchors her credibility. [ 31 ] Her father cannot accept this decision and remains in denial and misunderstanding. [ 32 ] Although offered tools to communicate more effectively with his daughter and adjust to her growing needs, his need to have his principles vindicated overwhelms his capacity to invest himself in this process. [ 33 ] As such, something as simple as responding to his daughter’s request to text her becomes an issue and ultimately, a further message of dismissal of her feelings.

Such is but one example of a consistent positioning by the father. [ 34 ] For the child, this situation further anchors her feelings of being dismissed and disregarded, contributing to her continued distress. [ 35 ] For these reasons, the Court retains a situation of educational neglect. [ 36 ] What measures should be put in place as a remedy, while protecting the child? [ 37 ] Once a situation of endangerment is identified, the Youth Protection Act provides that protective measures be put in place with the principle objectives of working towards its rehabilitation while protecting the child. [ 38 ] In this situation, the child benefits from parents who are devoted to her well-being and offer her positive values. [ 39 ] With reason, the father underlines that his daughter is presently being deprived of the strong family relationships, values and cultural richness of his environment.

Although he doesn’t deny his daughter’s voice, he considers that the true narrative is not being revealed and that his parental role is threatened. [ 40 ] The mother also plays a role in this ongoing situation and assumes a responsibility within the dynamic in place. [ 41 ] The child has a myriad of needs. She has the right to benefit from environments which will promote her reaching her full potential and ensure her physical and psychological well-being.

Numerous elements presently overshadow her mental stability and overall functioning and these must be the focus of the measures put in place. [ 42 ] In this aspect, the child is able to offer a reasoned and sensible overview of her needs.

Her choices, although seemingly drastic, are acts of self-preservation before the intensity of her distress and the inability of her parents to shield her from its sources. [ 43 ] As the situation has not evolved, she remains overwhelmed and at risk. [ 44 ] A simple resumption of the shared custody is not only not in her best interests, but would result in a message of disregard of the outstanding issues, while serving to further entrench her feelings of disempowerment.

Such is not a passage to resolution. [ 45 ] The child is ready to invest herself in a rehabilitative process and has done so, despite the pressures this incurs.

She wants to move forward, but needs to regain confidence in her father. [ 46 ] Up until now, it remains to be seen if the parents are finally able to overcome their past, move forward and invest themselves in the difficult changes which are required. [ 47 ] Until such time, the Director’s orientation remains the best way to maintain her balance. [ 48 ] The Court resumes its expectations within the process of rehabilitation: • Both parents accept responsibility for the separation conflict; • That the child and her father invest themselves in a mediation process; • That the parents participate in services towards putting in place effective and meaningful co-parenting; • That the parents receive personal follow-ups to help them move forward; FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 49 ] GRANTS the application for protection; [ 50 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child are in danger for the following reasons: • Psychological ill-treatment (article 38c) Youth Protection Act ) • Educational neglect (article 38b)1)iii) Youth Protection Act ) [ 51 ] ENTRUSTS the child to her mother; [ 52 ] ORDERS that the child’s contacts with her father be determined following mutual agreement by the parties and in consideration of the child’s wishes; [ 53 ] ORDERS that the resumption of visitation be conditional to the father participating in a mediation process with his daughter;

[ 54 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to accompany the child and her father during contacts, if such is necessary; [ 55 ] ORDERS that the parents actively participate in the measures required to end the situation of endangerment and more specifically: • That the parents participate in co-parenting meetings with the objective of improving their communication and their parental relationship; • That the father participates in a mediation process with his daughter with the accompaniment of a caseworker; [ 56 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents seek individual professional support in relation to the parental conflict; [ 57 ] ORDERS that an organization or body provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and her family; [ 58 ] ALL THESE MEASURES for 9 months; [ 59 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of the order. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q.

Me Mélissa Labine Attorney for the Applicant Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the child Dates of hearing: December 9, 2020, February 5, 2021