2020 QCCQ 12774, 2020 QCCQ 12774

Protection de la jeunesse — 209247 2020 QCCQ 12774 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-41-006339-207 DATE: November 3, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X , born on [...], 2020 Child ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION A Applicant v.

A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] Alleging that the child is subject to educational and health neglect in her family environment, the Director of Youth Protection seeks a one year protection order. [ 2 ] The mother as well as the child’s attorney, within her legal mandate, subscribes to the Director’s evaluation as well as its suggested orientation. As for the father, the Court dispenses service and proceeds in his absence. Analysis and decision [ 3 ] The Director intervenes in the child’s situation as of May 2020.

She resides with her mother and two maternal half-siblings. Her father is mostly uninvolved in her life. [ 4 ] Since December 2019, the Director is involved with the family as concerns the child’s autistic half-brother who is subject to a serious risk of neglect and exposure to conjugal conflicts. An agreement on voluntary measures intervenes, stipulating various protective measures for 9 months. [ 5 ] Despite this agreement, the mother offers little collaboration with the social services follow-up. She is difficult to reach and/or doesn’t respond to messages. She lacks transparency.

The mother doesn’t fully recognize that she is not responding to her son’s needs nor that her failure to pursue services impacts his development. [ 6 ] Since her birth in [...] 2020, the child has ongoing health concerns relating to her weight and muscle tone. At 4 months old, she weighs only 8 pounds. In June, she is hospitalized for a week in reason of her failure to thrive.

After medical evaluations, this situation is not linked to any underlying malady. [ 7 ] Following this hospitalization, although the mother is given specific instruction on her child’s care and follow-up, she doesn’t faithfully follow through on many of these (night feeding, etc.). The medical staff is also unable to reach her to get information on the child’s evolution.

The mother refuses home visits, but attends other appointments. [ 8 ] Multiple observations confirm the precariousness of the child’s situation, namely a lack of routine, supervision and regular medical care. [ 9 ] In July 2020, the Director presents a request for provisional measures following which the mother is ordered to participate actively by following medical recommendations and reporting the child’s evolution to health care professionals and the Director.

[ 10 ] After this order, the mother offers a more sustained cooperation. Although issues are still present, the mother is seen to be more diligent and consistent as to her children’s medical needs. She is more open to recommendations. [ 11 ] The child maintains a healthy weight. Assessments are ongoing as to her motor skills and any required services. Although her situation remains fragile, her situation is improved and being maintained. [ 12 ] As for the father, he has been mostly absent since his daughter’s birth. His background and lifestyle are questioning.

Should he wish to assume a parental role and contacts, an assessment will be required to verify his personal situation and ability to invest himself in his daughter’s life. [ 13 ] In consideration of the evidence and the consent of the parties, the Court concludes that the security and the development of the child are in danger for the reasons invoked by the Director. The Court further endorses the measures suggested, which are the reflection of the child's best interest and the objectives of the law.

FOR ALL THESE REASONS: [ 14 ] GRANTS the application for protection; [ 15 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child are in danger for the following reasons: • Neglect of health care needs (article 38b)1)ii) Youth Protection Act ) • Educational neglect (article 38b)1)iii) Youth Protection Act ) [ 16 ] ORDERS that the child remain with her mother; [ 17 ] ORDERS the contacts between the child and her father be determined following mutual agreement between the parties; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the parents report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures that apply in their own regard or their child ; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered and more notably: [ 20 ] ORDERS that the parents follow the medical recommendations and report the child’s evolution to her health care professionals as well as to the Director of Youth Protection [ 21 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution provides aid, counselling or assistance to the child and her family; [ 22 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth protection to communicate with the health care professionals concerned by the child’s situation; [ 23 ] ALL THESE MEASURES for one year; [ 24 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child 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 Maryse Fournier Attorney for the mother Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the child Date of hearing: November 3, 2020 Date of signature: January 5, 2021