r v. A, 2015 QCCQ 13816

Protection de la jeunesse — 153048 2015 QCCQ 13816 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-41-004855-154 DATE: May 13, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X Born: […], 1999 Adolescent ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION OF LE CENTRE JEUNESSE A Petitioner 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 ] The Director of Youth Protection presents a motion for protection concerning X, born on […], 1999, alleging that her security and development are endangered in reason of serious behavioural disturbances [ 2 ] Within the application of various protective measures for 9 months, the Director recommends that the Court entrust the adolescent to a reception center for 3 months, following which there would be a return to her maternal environment. [ 3 ] The adolescent and her parents consign their admissions to the Court file.

While the parents declare being in agreement with the conclusions sought by the Director of Youth Protection, the adolescent declares to accepting this position and offers no contestation. [ 4 ] Analysis and decision [ 5 ] The parents are separated and X resides with her mother. She sees her father sporadically. [ 6 ] The Director of Youth Protection intervenes following a complaint that the adolescent is exhibiting serious behavioural disturbances.

During the evaluation, there is confirmation that she is consistently presenting the following: • Repeatedly running away from home; • Delinquency (stealing); • Opposition to authority and rules; • High-risk behaviours (consuming drugs and alcohol, fraternizing with adult men); [ 7 ] The family environment is chronically unable to maintain a consistent and coherent structure to the adolescent, leading to the development and adoption of her dysfunctional behaviours.

With time, this situation intensifies to where the adolescent puts herself in situations which endanger her physical and psychological integrity. [ 8 ] The parents collaborate fully with the evaluation. They admit that the efforts of the family environment to structure their daughter is of little impact. The parents admit being overwhelmed and not being able to ensure her safety. They agree to the placement of the adolescent in view of her eventual return home within a renewed dynamic.

[ 9 ] On April 10 th , the parties sign a voluntary agreement providing for a 30 day provisional placement of the adolescent in a reception center. A week later, the adolescent retracts her consent, provoking the inception of the Court process, which prolongs her placement to this day. [ 10 ] At the beginning of her placement, the adolescent is resistant to the interventions and the structure. She shows little introspection and openness. The relationship with her parents remains fragile and she continues to show defiance towards their authority.

As of now, the situation remains precarious, justifying that she remain in placement. [ 11 ] The Director offers a coherent lecture of the adolescent’s situation, underlining the following goals: • The adolescent show more introspection as to her behaviours and their consequences; • The adolescent demonstrate transparency as to her personal situation; • The parents learn to impose their authority; • The parents offer coherent and consistently applied rules and consequences; • The adolescent respect that authority; • Rebuild the trust in the parent/child relationships; [ 12 ] After considering the evidence, the Court concludes that the security and the development of the adolescent are in danger in reason of serious behavioural disturbances.

The Court endorses the measures suggested by the Director of Youth Protection, which are the reflection of the adolescent's best interest, while concurrently receiving the acceptance of the adolescent and her parents. [ 13 ] FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 14 ] GRANTS the motion for protection; [ 15 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the adolescent are in danger in reason of serious behavioural disturbances; [ 16 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to a reception center for a period of 3 months; [ 17 ] ENTRUSTS the adolescent to her mother as of August 13, 2015; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and her parents participate actively in the measures design to put an end to the situation of endangerment; [ 19 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or a body provides aid, counselling and assistance to the adolescent and her family for a period of 9 months; [ 20 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the adolescent to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the measures. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q.

Me Marie La Roche Attorney for the Petitioner Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the adolescent Date of hearing: May 13, 2015