2014 QCCQ 14756, 2014 QCCQ 14756

Protection de la jeunesse — 142916 2014 QCCQ 14756 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000646-141 DATE: June 12, 2014 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], exercising her profession at the Centre jeunesse A, having a place of having a place of business at […] at Town A, district A Petitioner -and- X, domiciled and residing at […] at Tow B, district A Child -and- A, domiciled and residing […] at Town B, district A Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Sections 38 & 75 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 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection makes an application to have the security and the development of X, born […], 2014, declared endangered due to a serious risk of neglect. [ 2 ] Considering the child is an infant, she is not present at the hearing but is represented by her lawyer who cannot make any admissions on her behalf. The mother is also absent but represented by her lawyer.

His mandate is however limited as he is unable to take position in regards of the application and the measures sought by the Director of Youth Protection. The father is undeclared on the birth certificate. THE FACTS [ 3 ] X is the mother’s fifth child. Following the involvement of the Director of Youth Protection, the mother’s other children have been removed from her care.

The mother has a long history of drug abuse that impacts all aspects of her life. [ 4 ] The mother gave birth to the chid in Town C [Province A] after a referral by the hospital A due to possible complications because of the mother’s drug use during pregnancy. The evidence reveals that the mother did admit to regular use of cocaine and marijuana during her pregnancy. Opiates were found in the infant’s urine shortly after birth. The same day, the Director of Youth Protection received a report concerning the newborn.

After assessment, the Director’s delegate concluded to a serious risk of neglect due to the mother’s longstanding and unresolved drug use. [ 5 ] Shortly after the child’s birth, the parties concluded a 30-day provisional agreement following which the child was placed in a foster family. At the expiration of the agreement, a provisional foster care order was rendered by judge Claude P.

Bigué. [ 6 ] X was exposed to utero drug consumption and as a possible consequence, it is reported that she was very irritable during two or three weeks. [ 7 ] The mother expressed to the applicant the wish to care for X and requested time to get the necessary help and services. Considering her personal history, concrete measures were suggested to her such as a treatment program for drug abuse, as well as an aftercare program and parenting classes. In an attempt to develop an attachment bond between the mother and the child, the applicant put in place two hour long visits, three times a week.

Out of the sixteen scheduled visits, the mother missed half of them. For the visits that did occur, the mother did not have the means to bring the proper necessities for X in terms of diapers and a bottle of milk. A few days before the hearing, the mother entered a closed treatment program.

[ 8 ] Mrs [Social Worker 2] is a psychoeducator employed by the Director of Youth Protection. She gave evidence of her involvement with the mother, which started with her eldest child. She referred to the mother’s longstanding struggle with drug addiction that seriously impacts her ability to care for herself and her children. Over the years, the mother made at least 20 attempts to enter a closed treatment program. On each occasion, she could not bring herself to complete the program. [ 9 ] The mother lives with her girlfriend and according to the applicant that relationship is also characterized by instability.

The evidence also shows that the mother cannot count on support from friends and family. [ 10 ] The evidence presented convinces the Court that there is a serious risk of neglect pursuant to subparagraph 38 (b)

(2) Y.P.A. MEASURES APPLICABLES [ 11 ] The Director of Youth Protection requests that the child be entrusted to a foster family for a period of four months. According to the applicant, the mother entertains doubts as to the true intentions of the Director of Youth Protection in regards to her daughter and the willingness to provide help to her. The applicant testified in a forthright manner to inform the Court that the Director of Youth Protection is willing to support the mother in her latest attempt to get sober.

It was also made clear that the Director of Youth Protection will not impact the child’s opportunity for a permanent and stable placement if the mother does immediately not put herself into action. [ 12 ] It is quite clear that the mother cannot presently care for her daughter. Considering the mother’s personal history and that nothing was done during the pregnancy to stay sober, the mother has little time to put herself into action. Her intentions must lead to tangible actions and results.

By that the Court means that the mother needs to undergo a serious treatment program, follow in a valid aftercare plan and do the necessary to develop her parental skills. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 13 ] GRANTS the petition; [ 14 ] DECLARES the security and the development of X, born […], 2014, endangered pursuant to subparagraph 38 (b)

(2) Y.P.A.; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family for a period of four months; [ 16 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the mother and the chid be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection in terms of frequency and modalities; [ 17 ] RECOMMENDS that these contacts occur as often as possible; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the mother be sober when in presence of the child; [ 19 ] ORDERS the mother to play an active

part in the present measures; [ 20 ] ORDERS the mother to undergo and complete a closed treatment program for her drug addiction; [ 21 ] ORDERS the mother to actively participate in aftercare counselling at Centre jeunesse A for as long a judged necessary by the professional dispensing the services; [ 22 ] ORDERS the mother to report once a week to the Director of Youth Protection in order to inform him of her current situation; [ 23 ] ORDERS the mother to submit to random drug screening tests upon the request of the Director of Youth Protection; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the child receives health care services required by her situation; [ 25 ] ORDERS that a person working for a institution or body provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and the mother for a period of six months; [ 26 ] WITHDRAWS from the mother the exercise of certain attributes of parental authority regarding medical care and authorizations as well as health services and GRANTS the exercise of the said attributes to the Director of Youth Protection; [ 27 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate to the respect of the present judgment; [ 28 ] ENTRUSTS the child's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of the present judgment. __________________________________ NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q.

M e Pierre Grygiel Centre jeunesse A Lawyer for the D.Y.P. M e Sébastien Lebel Lawyer for the child

M e Daniel Ouellette Legal Aid Lawyer for the mother Date of hearing: June 4, 2014