2021 QCCQ 10569, 2021 QCCQ 10569

Protection de la jeunesse — 215933 2021 QCCQ 10569 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-41-006613-213 DATE: August 27, 2021 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X, born on [...], 2004 Youth ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION A Applicant v.

A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON ENDANGERMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 applies for a protection order in regards to the youth X, relating to sexual abuse (father), her behavioural issues and related educational neglect. [ 2 ] The father is absent, although being duly advised of the proceedings. He has been uninvolved in his daughter’s life for many years. [ 3 ] The youth and her mother consign their agreement as to the situation of endangerment.

The parties jointly propose that the hearing on the final measures be postponed in order to better evaluate her needs, namely the viability of her completing her substance abuse program. [ 4 ] After evaluating the evidence, the Court endorses this proposal. The facts justifying this decision are as follows. Analysis and decision [ 5 ] The youth resides with her mother.

She hasn’t seen her father in about 7 years. [ 6 ] For the last several years, the youth exhibits increasingly problematic behaviours, namely: • Opposition and impulsiveness; • Drug use on a regular basis; • Suicidal ideation; • Self-mutilation; • Sexual promiscuity; • Emotional outbursts; [ 7 ] Her mother admits being regularly overwhelmed by her daughter’s behaviours and to being sometimes inconsistent as to structure. She has sought services, but the youth’s refusal or lack of collaboration impede any real change. [ 8 ] The family dynamic is oftentimes tense and subject to conflict.

[ 9 ] Since August 2020, various voluntary measures are put in place, including the youth’s integration in a rehabilitation centre. The services of a CSRE educator support the mother as to her parenting. [ 10 ] In reason of her dependency issues, she attends the [Centre A] from August 2020 to April 2021. Her passage is punctuated with numerous incidents of destructive behaviours (auto mutilation, suicidal ideation, running away), some of which result in her hospitalization. [ 11 ] At the end of the year, the youth denounces having been sexually abused by her father from the ages of 5 to 10.

She is able to describe numerous incidents of gestures of a sexual nature, from her father exposing himself to her, to her being encouraged/forced into sexual contacts. [ 12 ] She relates this situation to her distress and self-destructive behaviours. [ 13 ] While accepting that his daughter might have been abused, her father denies it being by him. He explains his absence by the conflictual relationship with the mother. He states wishing his daughter to get the help she requires. [ 14 ] In April, the youth leaves the program in a distressed state.

Returning to her mother’s care, she struggles to commit to the [program A] and quickly reverts to her previous destructive behaviours. [ 15 ] Shortly thereafter, her father phones her. They have not spoken for seven years. The youth unloads her feelings as to his responsibility for her issues in reason of what he had done. She wishes no further contacts between them. [ 16 ] A month later, during a sleepover at a friend’s house, the youth takes 8 of the father’s Ativan pills.

Following this incident, the Court orders her return to a placement in a rehabilitation centre on a provisional basis. [ 17 ] [Centre A] initially refuses to reintegrate the youth into the program, requesting a psychiatric evaluation to better understand her mental health needs as well as her demonstration of her willingness to participate. Since then, she resumes her participation in the [program A] and shows a better investment. [ 18 ] In the rehabilitation centre setting, the youth continues to struggle with her issues.

She accepts certain services, but isn’t ready to address her sexual abuse. [ 19 ] Evaluations are ongoing as to her mental health needs.

The mother submits that her integration in a residential program (Douglas Hospital) should be considered in view of the impacts of her mental health issues on her emotional stability. [ 20 ] Although progress is observed, it is still in early stages. [ 21 ] The evidence permits the Court to conclude to the situation of endangerment as alleged by the Director. [ 22 ] As concerns the sexual abuse allegations, the youth maintains a coherent and detailed version of events which are also relatable to the steady degeneration of her functioning and self-destructive behaviours. [ 23 ] Interim measures represent the youth’s best interests as further stabilization is necessary in order to better situate her needs on a longer term basis.

As well, this permits her mother to continue developing adapted parenting skills and regaining her authority.

FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 24 ] GRANTS the application for protection; [ 25 ] DECLARES the security and the development of the youth in danger for the following reasons: • educational neglect (article 38b)1)iii) Youth Protection Act ); • serious behavioural disturbance (article 38f) Youth Protection Act ); • sexual abuse (article 38d)1) Youth Protection Act ); AS INTERIM MEASURES: [ 26 ] ENTRUSTS the youth to an institution operating a rehabilitation centre chosen by the Director of Youth Protection A; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the youth and her parents by following agreement between the parties and as concerns her father, following her expressed wishes; [ 28 ] TAKES ACT that the youth does not wish contact with her father at the present time; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the parents report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or their child’s regard to put an end to the situation in which her security or development is in danger; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the youth and her parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 31 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counselling or assistance to the youth and her family; [ 32 ] RECOMMENDS that the father undertake a follow-up in relation to sexual delinquency;

[ 33 ] ORDERS that the youth receive all health services necessary including a follow-up as to her mental health through [Centre B] ; [ 34 ] RECOMMENDS that services through IVAC, Centre Marie Vincent as well as, if possible by the Douglas Hospital, be offered to the youth; [ 35 ] TAKES ACT that the youth is open to receiving such services; [ 36 ] SCHEDULES the hearing on applicable measures on October 6, 2021 for a pro forma or agreement; [ 37 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the present judgment. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q.

Me Sarah Gaudry-Staub Attorney for the Applicant Me Richard Walker Attorney for the youth Date of hearing: August 27, 2021 Date of signature: October 4, 2021