2017 QCCQ 5103, 2017 QCCQ 5103

Protection de la jeunesse — 172293 2017 QCCQ 5103 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] « Youth Division » N° : 525-41-031903-164 DATE : February 14, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE FRANÇOIS STE-MARIE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION and X Born on [...], 2006 Child and A B parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT

Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act (R.S.Q. c. P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ Warning : The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcast of information allowing a child or the child’s parents to be identified. Every person who contravenes this provision is liable to a fine (sections 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] In accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act , the Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for the decision rendered from the bench at the hearing held on February 14, 2017. Introduction [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection (the Director) alleges that the child’s basic physical needs and support needs are not met.

The Director also alleges that there is a serious risk that the child’s basic needs are not met. [ 3 ] On January 19, 2017, the Tribunal placed the child in the foster family of her maternal grandparents on a temporary basis. [ 4 ] Today, the Director proposes that the child remain placed in the foster family of her grandparents and that support measures be provided to the child and her family for a period of 1 year. [ 5 ] The mother admitted most of the alleged facts in the Director’s motion and agreed with the proposed plan.

Question in litigation [ 6 ] Are the proposed measures meeting with the child’s needs and respecting the child’s rights? Context and Analysis [ 7 ] From October 15 2009 to November 1, 2010, the child’s situation was followed by the Director.

At the time, the child was placed with her maternal grandmother as the mother was experiencing suicidal ideations, consuming cocaine and had a gambling addiction. [ 8 ] From February 18, 2014 until August 18, 2014, the child’s situation was followed by the Director of Youth Protection under a voluntary measures agreement as the child was exposed to violence and the mother was experiencing instability. [ 9 ] From December 8, 2014 until December 8, 2015, the child’s situation was followed by the Director of Youth Protection

following the decision of the Honourable Judge Guy Lecompte. [ 10 ] On August 27, 2015, the mother underwent a parental capacity assessment. [ 11 ] Mr. C, the mother’s ex-partner, and the maternal grandmother reported to the youth protection worker that the mother had gambling and drug consumption issues, which the mother first denied. The mother has struggled with such issues in the past. On December 15, 2016, the mother acknowledged to the police that she still had gambling issues.

The mother reports that, for the moment, those issues are under control. [ 12 ] On November 29, 2016, the mother’s random drug test came back as positive for marijuana. [ 13 ] The mother did not register the child in school for the 2016-17 school year. [ 14 ] The child has been diagnosed with Autism (Asperger). [ 15 ] The mother has been struggling financially. She receives support from Ometz. The mother refuses to go on welfare and borrows money from people in the community.

The mother has mentioned that she would like to leave, with the children, for Israel as she owes money to many people. [ 16 ] The mother has been neglecting the child basic needs (food). [ 17 ] The mother has left the child with various caregivers. [ 18 ] In June 2016, when she was evicted from her home, the mother left the child with the maternal grandmother, while she tried to stabilize her own situation. [ 19 ] During a certain period, the mother resided with Mr. C, Y and Z, the child’s siblings, as she did not have another place to reside.

During that time, Y and Z were exposed to conflicts between the mother and Mr. C. [ 20 ] On December 15, 2016, the mother reported to the police that, since the last four months, she was sexually assaulted by Mr. C on numerous occasions. Each time she was sleeping at his house, Mr.

C would made sexual advances towards her, having intercourse without her consent, in the same room where Y and Z were sleeping. [ 21 ] From the week of December 12, 2016 to January 16, 2017, the mother resided in a shelter. [ 22 ] Since January 16, 2017, the mother stated that she moved into her own apartment. [ 23 ] On January 19, 2017, the Tribunal placed the child in the foster family of her maternal grandparents on a temporary basis. [ 24 ] Since, the mother has not been consistent with her visits to the child. [ 25 ] The maternal grandparents are ensuring that all the child’s needs are met.

The mother will need to stabilize her own situation before thinking about a possible reintegration of the child to her care. THEREFORE AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 26 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 27 ] DECLARES that the security or the development of the child is endanged ( sections 38 b) 1 o i, b) 1 o iii, b) 2 o of the Youth Protection Act ); [ 28 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to the foster home of her maternal grandparents, Mr. and Mrs.

D; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the child and her mother be determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 30 ] TAKES NOTE that the mother should not be discussing any adult issues with her daughter; [ 31 ] ORDERS the mother, as she had agreed, to undergo random drug testing at the request of the worker; [ 32 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS the mother to continue to participate in professional therapeutic process to address her addictions as she already started that process; [ 33 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS the mother to follow the recommendations stemming from the parental capacity assessment dated August 27, 2016 by Dr.

Cloutier (i.e. that she be assessed for possible ADHD disorder, that she work with an educator and that she pursue individual therapy); [ 34 ] ORDERS the mother to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection and meet with the worker when requested; [ 35 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to share and obtain relevant information with any professional treating with the family; [ 36 ] ORDERS that a person working for a Child and Youth Protection Centre provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her family;

[ 37 ] THE WHOLE for a period of one year; [ 38 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; __________________________________ François Ste-Marie, J.C.Q. Signed on March 6, 2017 /cd Mtre Heidi Lechter Counsel for the Director of Youth Protection Mtre Christian Benoît Counsel for the child Mtre Josée Lefebvre Counsel for the mother Date of hearing: February 14, 2017