2015 QCCQ 8416, 2015 QCCQ 8416

Protection de la jeunesse — 15474 2015 QCCQ 8416 JL4031 COURT OF QUÉBEC Youth Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] N° : 525-41-029297-157 DATE: March 20 th , 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDED BY : Mr.

JUSTICE CLAUDE LAMOUREUX, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ In the matter of : X Born on: […], 2004 The Director of Youth Protection A applicant - and - A, the mother respondent ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (section 38 of the Youth Protection Act) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcasting of any information that may lead to the identification of a child or his parents.

Any person who contravenes this provision commits an offence and is liable to fine. [ Y.P.A. sections 11.2.1 and 135 ] [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection ( the Director) seized the Court with a motion under

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act requesting that the security or development of the child be declared to be in danger. The Director is essentially alleging that the mother became physical with her daughter while intoxicated on new-year’s eve and that the mother has had problems in the past where she has become aggressive while inebriated. [ 2 ] As explained later, X is currently entrusted to Mrs. B under a provisional Court order. [ 3 ] Today, the Director is recommending that X remain entrusted to Mrs. B and her husband, Mr.

C, for nine months with integration to her mother’s care in six months if the situation allows. [ 4 ] The mother is present and not assisted by an attorney. She would have preferred to have her daughter back but in the circumstances she consents to the measures proposed by the Director. [ 5 ] Me Choquette-Stuart, for the child, consents as well to the measures proposed by the Director. [ 6 ] The facts establish that X normally lives with her mother. The father is undeclared but would have passed away in 2013. [ 7 ] The mother has had problems with alcohol consumption in the past.

Indeed, the Director became involved with the mother in March 2013, first in relation to school absenteeism but then, because the mother was drinking and becoming very aggressive towards her boyfriend at the time, Mr. D. It is for this reason that X was placed in foster care in July 2013. X went to live with Mr. D’s mother,

Mrs. B, in August 2013. Then, in September, 2013, the undersigned declared X’s security or development compromised and ordered that she remain with Mrs. B for six months and that the Director remain involved for one year. [ 8 ] As the mother regained her sobriety and that there were no other youth protection concerns, X returned to her mother’s care in March 2014.

The youth protection case was closed in September 2014. [ 9 ] The mother continued to meet with an addictions counsellor at the [Shelter A] until December 2014 then stopped when her counsellor left. [ 10 ] Both the child and the mother state that the mother had not consumed between X’s return home in March 2014 and the end of December 2014. [ 11 ] A serious incident took place on New Year’s Eve. The mother and daughter were at a party and the mother became intoxicated (alcohol and marijuana). She returned home with her daughter and her erratic behaviour caused the child to become scared.

X therefore climbed out her window and returned to where the party had been taking place. A short while later, the mother arrived and became physical with her daughter. More specifically, the mother grabbed her daughter by the throat and the police were called to intervene. The police report indicates that the mother’s behaviour as being very aggressive and hysterical, that she made threats against people at the party and provided false identification to the police.

The mother was arrested and charged with assault, death threats and obstructing a police officer. [ 12 ] The child was brought to the hospital and kept overnight. The doctor noted that the child “ sustained three significant lacerations on her throat that appear to have been the result of mother’s grip and nails .” (D-4) [ 13 ] Upon discharge, the child was entrusted to Mrs. B and her husband, Mr. C. The mother’s former boyfriend, Mr. D, also lives in this home with his parents. The mother trusts the B-C home and prefers that the child reside with them rather than a foster home.

The child has remained there under an interim Court order rendered on January 12, 2015. The said order also allowed for the Director to organize mother-daughter contacts and to request random drug testing of the mother. [ 14 ] The mother quickly pleaded guilty to some of the charges, including the assault on her daughter. Under criminal court conditions, she can only have contact with her daughter in accordance with a decision by Youth Protection Services. [ 15 ] An incident took place approximately two weeks ago where the mother contacted the police stating concerns for her daughter in the B-C home.

The police went to the home but found no concerns. The mother later called the home and ended up there at around 1 am and rang the door bell several times before leaving. The mother states that she was not inebriated during this incident. X was aware of her mother’s presence and expressed being frightened by her behaviour. [ 16 ] X has had contact with her mother in the presence of one of her caregivers.

She remains apprehensive about having contact with her mother and returning home. [ 17 ] The mother has not engaged in therapeutic services to address her drinking. [ 18 ] The Director did not ask the mother to submit to random alcohol testing, as allowed by the January interim order, but may do so in the future. [ 19 ] The BC home is being assessed as a foster family for X. [ 20 ] No youth protection concerns exist when the mother is not inebriated.

She appears to provide the child with excellent care and the mother-child relationship is very positive. [ 21 ] The Court agrees with the Director’s recommendations but will allow for X’s return to her mother in four months (rather than six) so as to allow an integration during the summer if the situation allows. CONSEQUENTLY, AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 22 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 23 ] DECLARES that the security or development of X is in danger due to physical abuse and serious risk of neglect on the part of the mother. [ 24 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted to Mrs. B and Mr.

C; [ 25 ] TAKES NOTICE that their home is being assessed as a Famille d’Accueil de proximité and if approved, that X will be entrusted to them as a foster family; [ 26 ] AUTHORIZES X’s reintegration to the mother’s care after four (4) months if the situation allows it; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the mother and X be determined by the Director and encouraged as much as possible; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the mother seek professional and/or community support to maintain her sobriety, including relapse prevention programs and ORDERS the Director to help the mother to find the appropriate services; [ 29 ] ORDERS the mother to not consume alcohol or use illicit substances in the child’s presence, not to expose the child to any

people using substances; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the mother submit to random alcohol testing, if deemed necessary by the Director; [ 31 ] ORDERS a person working for [centre A] to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and the family; [ 32 ] THE WHOLE FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR; [ 33 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection A who shall see that these measures are carried out and these measures may be executed by any peace officer, if necessary. _________________________________ CLAUDE LAMOUREUX, J.C.Q. M e Isabelle F. Loranger Attorney for the applicant M e Maria Choquette-Stuart Attorney for the child Judgment rendered verbally on March 20 th , 2015 CL/nl