2015 QCCQ 10418, 2015 QCCQ 10418

Protection de la jeunesse — 151420 2015 QCCQ 10418 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] Youth Division No: 145-41-000457-140 DATE: February 17, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JANICK POIRIER, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], authorized person by the DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Petitioner and X born on […], 2013 Child and A and 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 ] The Director of youth protection (DYP) asks the Court to declare that the security or development of the child is in danger, because he would be neglected. [ 2 ] On August 19, 2014, the DYP received a call requesting an urgent intervention at the child’s residence. The situation at home was unbearable. The mother was passed out on the couch and it was difficult to wake her up. The house smelled of feces and urine. The place was very messy.

The child and his older sister were left to themselves and wearing dirty clothes. [ 3 ] The sister had bruises on different parts of her body. She told the youth protection delegate her mother did it, which was strongly denied by the mother. [ 4 ] On the same day, both children were removed and entrusted to foster families, where they remain. The child actually lives with his paternal grandfather. [ 5 ] According to the mother, she had just broken up with the father, prior to the DYP’s intervention. Domestic violence, drugs and alcohol were part of their life.

The mother also made suicide threats, but she said it was only because she was upset. [ 6 ] In regards with the sister’s bruises, the mother blames her spouse, the child’s father. [ 7 ] Since her children were taken away, the mother cooperates with the DYP and tries to put her life back on track. She was involved in a treatment program in order to solve her substance abuse issues. [ 8 ] The first part of the hearing was held on December 3.

Following the evidence rendered on that day, the Court was able to declare, orally, that the security and development of the child were endangered because he suffered neglect. [ 9 ] At the father’s request, the Court set a new date to hear the parties on the measures, since the father was not present in December. [ 10 ] Meanwhile, things have evolved. [ 11 ] Both parents attended treatment for their addiction issues. They also resumed their relationship last December. They have visits with the child, under supervision. [ 12 ] The mother still cooperates with the DYP.

The youth protection delegate testifies that some work was done with the mother, with regards to addiction issues. However, work towards parenting is to be achieved prior to the child’s returning home.

[ 13 ] As for the father, he did not meet with the youth protection delegate, despite her request to see him when he came to the area in December. [ 14 ] The DYP asks for measures until the end of April. Both parents’ counsels agree to those recommendations, while the parents are not present at the hearing. The child’s lawyer declares that the placement should be longer, as the youth protection delegate admitted in her testimony. He is right. [ 15 ] There is clear evidence to the effect that it is unrealistic to foresee the child returning home in a little more than two months.

Too much remains to be achieved by both parents. [ 16 ] The child is extremely vulnerable, due to his young age. He is totally dependent on the adults surrounding him. The parents’ difficulties are very serious and had a major impact on the child’s well-being. The child is currently evolving, happy and healthy, in his foster family. The child must be protected from the turmoil in which he had to live a few months ago. [ 17 ] A placement until the end of June appears as a minimum. The Court hopes that, meanwhile, both parents will continue their recovery process. Only time will tell.

WHEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 18 ] GRANTS the petition for protection; [ 19 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are in danger according to

section 38 of the Y outh protection act ; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family designated by the DYP until June 30, 2015; [ 21 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents actively participate in psychological counselling to help deal with their personal issues; [ 22 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother benefit from the [organism A] to teach life skills, coping skills and parenting skills; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the father benefit from parenting skills from an external educator; [ 24 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents continue their follow-up for their addiction problems, as long as deemed necessary by the professionals; [ 25 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents present themselves for medical laboratory drugs tests whenever requested by the DYP with or without notice and that results be submitted to the DYP; [ 26 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents remain involved with their son through regular visitation when deemed appropriate, supervised if deemed necessary with the DYP and that the terms set forth for those visits, as agreed upon by the parties, are followed by the parents; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the parents actively participate in the application of the ordered measures; [ 28 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide to the child and his family, aid, counsels and assistance until June 30, 2015; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the DYP of the Centre Jeunesse A for the carrying out of the present judgment. __________________________________ JANICK POIRIER, J.C.Q.

Me Louyse A. Lemieux for the petitioner Me Hugo Caissy for the child Me Florence Frappier-Routhier for the mother Me Mathieu Racine for the father

Date of hearing: February 4, 2015