2022 QCCQ 14355, 2022 QCCQ 14355

Protection de la jeunesse — 229056 2022 QCCQ 14355 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-002607-213 DATE: August 8, 2022 (written judgment rendered on September 28, 2022) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2013 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A Applicant and B Mother and C Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 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, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) asks the Court to prolong a decision rendered on May 13, 2021, regarding the child X, born on [...], 2013.

At that date the Court declared the security and development endangered, entrusted the child to a foster family for a period of 6 months and ordered that the child be gradually reintegrated under the care of the mother as soon as the situation allows it. [ 2 ] The DYP submits that the situation does not allow to return the children to their parents, asks that Y and X be entrusted to a foster family and that the reintegration occur with the parents if the situation allows it, until June 30, 2023. [ 3 ] The Court proceeds on the application under

section 95 and to avoid the DYP to produce an amended application, the Court authorized that the new facts alleged in the application under

section 76.1 filed in February 2022, be added. Position of the Parties [ 4 ] The mother is present and represented by Me Michaël Pereira. She recognizes that the security and development of her child are still endangered and that his situation is also endangered due to the physical abuse he had been the victim of. She agrees with the placement at the paternal grandmother’s place, but she asks for the child to be progressively reintegrated under her care. [ 5 ] The father is present and represented by Me Angèle Tommasel.

He recognizes that the security and development of his child are still endangered and he agrees that the new ground of endangerment be added. He agrees with the measures. [ 6 ] The child is 8 ½ years old. He is absent, but represented by Me Cassandra Neptune. After hearing the evidence, Me Neptune submits to the Court that the situation of the child is still endangered, that the situation is also endangered under the new ground and that the measures are in his best interest. [ 7 ] The child has siblings, Y (6 y), Z (3

y) and A (17 m). The Court is also seized with their situation. History of the Situation [ 8 ] On May 13, 2021 , the situation of the child was submitted to the Court. The evidence shown that the parents displayed alcohol and conjugal violence issues. The father also displayed anger management issues. Since August 2020, the family is followed under voluntary measures. The children witness violence in the house and are victims of such violence from their father. The parents did not recognize their difficulties.

The Court declared that the security and development of the child were endangered [1] and entrusted the child to a foster family for a period of 6 months with a gradual reintegration under the mother’s care, the whole until May 31, 2022. [ 9 ] Since this decision, the hearing for the revision was postponed and the placement in foster family had been maintained.

Facts [ 10 ] Following the last decision, the child was entrusted to his paternal aunt, Ms. D. The placement lasted for only 2 weeks because Ms. D consumed alcohol in the presence of the child. As soon as May 27, 2021, the child had been entrusted to Ms. E. [ 11 ] When the child was in this foster family, he regularly went to his mother’s place and this later bring him back at his foster place. The child expresses that he did not want to be fostered there. [ 12 ] On June 29, 2021, the DYP worker accompanied the mother and the 2 boys at the nursing.

They had inappropriate sexual behaviours after having been themselves victims of sexual gestures in their foster family. Following that, they were immediately removed and place at the specialized foster family. After that, the children were moved 6 times until December 12, 2021, including another placement with their aunt, Ms. D which ended for the same reason as before. On December 24, 2021, they integrate their grandparents’ place. The plan was to reintegrate with their mother on February 4, 2022. [ 13 ] On January 26, 2022, the DYP received a report about physical abuse on the children from the mother.

A non-suggestive interview was performed 2 days after and the Sûreté du Québec concluded that the facts were founded. The DYP concluded that the situation of the children were endangered for physical abuse. [ 14 ] The maternal grandmother in Town A expressed being available to foster the 3 oldest children and the DYP proceeded with the transfer under her care. [ 15 ] The DYP is conscious about the fact that the children are attached to their mother and would like to see her regularly. Although the children had been the object of physical abuse, the contacts with their mother are positive for them.

For this reason, the DYP intend to organize as much contact as possible including video calls. Also, the DYP still consider that a reintegration is possible and wants to work on that matter with the mother. Unfortunately, since the beginning of the placement in Town A, no contact was organized because no one was available to organize it. [ 16 ] The mother always acknowledges her personal difficulties (alcohol consumption, conjugal violence and regulation of her emotions). Until January 2022, she collaborated with the services most of the time.

She made great efforts that gave some good results, but she also had periods of relapse. Overall, when it occurred, she had been able to protect her children from her issues. Unfortunately, her situation degenerated by January 2022. She physically abused her children, and she had been the object of few police interventions. [ 17 ] The mother confirms that she will present herself at the DYP office to prepare a calendar of visits with her children. She is ready to travel to Town A to see them more often. [ 18 ] The father was released from jail after serving 15 months of detention.

He never contacted the DYP to have information about his children. Analysis [ 19 ] The situation of endangerment alleged by the DYP is recognized by the parents. It is also what the evidence shows. [ 20 ] The parents agree with the measures, and those measures are in the best interest of the children. [ 21 ] For now, the children are in Town A, but the DYP worker is very clear that a reintegration is possible. Indeed, the mother is able, if she put the appropriate efforts, to change her way of life. When she is sober, she demonstrates very good parental capacities.

She has to work on her issues and to maintain her efforts. [ 22 ] The fact that she recognizes her issues is very positive and allows a lot of hope. Although it is very difficult to travel from Town B to Town C due to the plane schedule, the mother wants to maintain regular contacts with her children. FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 23 ] GRANTS the application; [ 24 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2013, are still endangered; [ 25 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2013, are also endangered under

section 38 (e) (1) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family, chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre; [ 27 ] ORDERS that X be reintegrated under his parents’ care if the situation allows it; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the parents report in person, at regular intervals, to the Director of Youth Protection to inform him of the current situation; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the parents remain sober and without any violent behaviour in the presence of the child; [ 31 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents seek help through the Social Services concerning their alcohol, drugs and personal issues; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and the parents be determined by the Director of Youth Protection as for the modalities, the frequency and the degree of supervision with the following minimal frequency:

• ORDERS that the children benefit from one monthly physical contact with their mother (the mother travelling to Town A or the children travelling to Town

B) plus regular video calls; [ 33 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or a body, provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the family; [ 34 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X , to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 35 ] THE WHOLE until June 30, 2023. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q. Me Adèle Cyr, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Me Michaël Pereira, attorney for the mother Me Angèle Tommasel, attorney for the father Date of hearing: August 8, 2022