2013 QCCQ 17523, 2013 QCCQ 17523

Protection de la jeunesse — 136044 2013 QCCQ 17523 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000385-088 DATE: October 15, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ MRS [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , exercising her profession at the Centre Jeunesse A, exercising her profession at the Centre jeunesse A, having a place of business at […] in City A, district A, […] Applicant -and- X, presently residing at […] at City B, district B, […] Adolescent -and- MRS A, unknown address Mother -and- MR [SOCIAL WORKER 2], Director of Youth Protection of the Centre jeunesse A, having a place of business at […] in City C (Québec) […] Tutor ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Sec. 95 (1) and 75 of the Youth Protection Act) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection presents an application under

section 95 of the Youth Protection Act by which it asks the Court to review a decision rendered on May 19, 2010, by B concerning X, born on […], 1997. [ 2 ] At the hearing the youth is present and represented by his lawyer. The mother is absent although she was duly served. The applicant spoke to the mother on the morning of the hearing, to learn that she was unable to attend court due to chronic pain. ISSUE TO RESOLVE [ 3 ] The present case does not raise any litigious issue since the adolescent recognizes the existence of new facts, which warrants the Court to review the previous decision.

In addition, the adolescent consents to the main recommendation made by the Director of Youth Protection to wit a six-month placement in a rehabilitation center. FACTS [ 4 ] On May 19, 2010, B declared that the security and development of the adolescent continued to be endangered, due to the mother's addiction to painkillers and her instability. X and his brother were then entrusted to a foster family until majority. [ 5 ] Following the last court order, the adolescent remained in the same foster family for a couple of years.

Afterwards, he started showing behavioural problems that affected his relationship with his foster family. As a result, the placement with this foster family broke down as did the following one last June. X was doing as he pleased and saw little use to report his whereabouts to his foster parents. He was moved from one foster family to another following an incident during which X put gas on a snake and lit it on fire. The snake slithered under the house causing a small fire. [ 6 ] In mid June, he was transferred to another foster family.

Unfortunately, a few weeks later the adolescent decided to spend the night at his aunt's without telling his foster parents. When the adolescent was at home with his foster family, he refused to comply with house rules. One evening, the adolescent returned home and was clearly under the influence of drugs. That night the foster family noticed that X was behaving in a very particular manner: the foster parents brought X food from the restaurant, he ate half of it and threw the rest out. Shortly after, he proceeded to prepare himself another meal.

Around 3 am, the adolescent left the house despite the foster parents'

objection. He came back three hours later with a backpack full of damp clothes. [ 7 ] X has the potential to succeed in class but failed to put in the necessary effort. Last spring, he chose to quit school although he was in a special program with fewer classes. [ 8 ] On July 26, 2013, this situation led to a provisional foster care order by which the adolescent was entrusted to a rehabilitation center. [ 9 ] During an incident at the rehabilitation center, the adolescent was seen scratching himself to the point of injury. He explained his behaviour by the fact that he had a bug under his skin.

This along with other occurrences raises questions as to the adolescent's mental health. [ 10 ] Despite the adolescent's close connection to his mother, everyone recognizes that she is unable to care for him. She is presently on a methadone program and still struggles with her personal stability, notably in regards to her living arrangements. [ 11 ] The above-mentioned evidence must be considered as new facts pursuant to

section 95 of the Youth Protection Act . Accordingly, the Court is entitled to review the previous decision. MEASURES TO REVIEW [ 12 ] During the hearing, the applicant amended her recommendations in order to ask a six-month placement in a rehabilitation center without integration of the adolescent with his cousin C, as previously requested. [ 13 ] In support of her recommendations, the applicant states that the adolescent needs a structured environment as well as a psychological assessment in order to learn more about his mental health in light of recurrent strange behaviour.

She also believes that the youth shows sign of addiction to marijuana although the youth denies such a problem. In order not to discourage the adolescent, the applicant maintains that a six-month placement is reasonable. The adolescent is in the process of being enrolled at A School. [ 14 ] Since the beginning of his stay at the rehabilitation center, X left twice without permission. Staff members report that the adolescent shows resistance to the re-education program and opposition to several rules.

In light of X's continuous disregard for the rules, a more intense structure was put in place such as automatic time out as a consequence to non-compliance with a rule followed by a meeting with an educator. This program has started to show some results. Moreover, the staff at the rehabilitation center also witnessed X laughing alone. Other incidents also make them question the adolescent's mental health. [ 15 ] Questioned by the Court as to his hopes and plans, X would like to go back and live in his community. He doesn't see the need to meet with a psychologist, as he feels uncomfortable talking about himself.

Regarding his behaviour, he is content to say that in the future he will be able to comply with rules in his next home. [ 16 ] As explained to X on the day of the hearing, his mental health is a cause for concern. A psychological assessment could provide useful information to better understand the adolescent's behaviour and therefore provide the appropriate services. [ 17 ] The Court will order such an assessment as part of the health services required by the adolescent's state. However, everyone agrees that X's collaboration is essential.

In this regard, the applicant is invited to work closely with the adolescent in the hope of making him realize the importance of such an initiative. A structured environment alone will most likely be insufficient. [ 18 ] For his part, X must invest serious efforts in his personal discipline and development. He must do is part and further his implication in the re-education program in place at the rehabilitation center.

If not, any attempt to entrust him to his cousin, C, is doomed to fail. [ 19 ] FOR THESES REASONS, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the petition; [ 21 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the adolescent are still endangered notably in regards to serious behavioural problems; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to a rehabilitation center for a period of six months; [ 23 ] ORDERS that a person working for a body or institution provide aid, counsel and assistance to the youth and his mother for a period of six months; [ 24 ] ALLOWS that during his stay at the rehabilitation center the adolescent have visits and overnight stays at his cousin's C if the situation allows it; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and his mother take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the adolescent and his mother and siblings be supervised by the D.Y.P. has to frequency and modalities; [ 27 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that there be contacts between the adolescent and his brother Y; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the adolescent receive specific health care and health services required by his state, notably a psychological assessment; [ 29 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the adolescent undergo an assessment regarding his marijuana consumption;

[ 30 ] ORDERS that the adolescent attend school or another place of learning; [ 31 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate for the purpose of executing the present judgment; [ 32 ] ENTRUSTS the adolescent’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of the present judgment. __________________________________ NANCY McKENNA, J.C.Q. M e Julie Lemire Lemire, Gaouette & Martel Centre jeunesse A Lawyer for the DYP M e Sébastien Lebel Lawyer for the adolescent Date of hearing: September 18, 2013