2018 QCCQ 14863, 2018 QCCQ 14863

Protection de la jeunesse — 185445 2018 QCCQ 14863 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] COMMUNITY OF […] Youth Division No: 635-41-000730-165 DATE: July 9, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE RENÉE LEMOINE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 2001 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of A Applicant v.

A , residing and domiciled at […] Mother and B , unknown address Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (sections 95(1) and 75 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcast of information allowing for a child or the child’s parents to be identified.

Every person who contravenes this provision is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine (ss. 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A .). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection filed an application for review of the decision rendered on October 30, 2017. [ 2 ] The recommendation is to entrust the adolescent to a foster family, and all the parties agree with that choice. [ 3 ] X is a 17-year-old adolescent who had been kept with her mother under the strict condition “that the mother ensure that there is no contact between X and C, including through social media”. [ 4 ] This condition was imposed in order to protect the adolescent because the mother has an emotional dependency on Mr.

C and she does not protect her daughter even though she is aware that he sexual abused her. [ 5 ] The last decision also ordered the services of an external educator to work intensively with the family, given the risk for X and her need for protection. [ 6 ] It is important to recall a portion of of Beauchemin J.’s decision: [22] The mother has no empathy for what her daughter may be experiencing following the mother’s decision to resume contact with X’s abuser. The adolescent is placed in a situation in which, if she wants contact with her mother, she has to go to Mr. C’s house.

That is clearly unacceptable. […] [24] This adolescent needs to speak to a counselor about her emotions, with a guarantee of confidentiality. A request should be made to IVAC to provide her with psychological support. She needs a protective and structured milieu, as she is still under age. It is useless to order that the adolescent be maintained with her mother if her mother is never at home, but is living with the adolescent’s abuser. […] [28] The mother seriously needs help to develop empathy for her children and to treat her emotional dependency on Mr. C. This is a process.

Consequently, the undersigned has decided that the recommended period of follow-up by social services was too short and ordered follow-up until June 30, 2018. Since last January, the mother has done nothing. She has to move back in with her children, and cooperate with the external educator, as well as with the youth worker assigned by the Director. […] [ 7 ] The Director of Youth Protection was fully informed of the adolescent’s needs and the mother’s difficulties in ensuring her daughter’s protection. [ 8 ] The evidence shows that nothing was done to protect the adolescent.

On the contrary, to the applicant’s knowledge, she did what she wanted. She clearly put herself in danger on different occasions. At least two different decisions of the Court were not respected or followed. [ 9 ] The Court is of the opinion that this vulnerable adolescent has not only been victimized by a lack of support from her mother but also abandoned by the Director because he did not assume his responsibility to protect her under the Youth Protection Act . [ 10 ] The following facts have been proven: − The adolescent remained under her mother’s care from October 30, 2017, until December 19, 2017.

On that date, she went to Town A to visit family members for the holidays. − Ms. [social worker 2], case worker in Town A, met her and agreed with the plan that she stay with her family members until the end of the holiday season. − On January 26, 2018, Ms. [social worker 2] was informed that the adolescent was still in Town A. She said that she does not want to live in Town B anymore because there is too much drama there. She stated that she was staying with her boyfriend, Mr. D, and was fine there.

She did not want to go back to Town B. − On January 26, until February 7, 2018, the mother was unreachable despite numerous attempts to contact her. − On February 7, 2018, Ms. [social worker 2] met with the adolescent. She stated that she drinks alcohol sometimes but not on a regular basis. She sometimes stayed at E’s place and sometimes with friends and at other family members’ places. − On February 11, 2018, the applicant got a call from the police to inform her that she had been assaulted by her boyfriend, Mr. D. She was intoxicated by alcohol. The adolescent was medevaced because she has a broken hand.

She was punched several times and bitten twice. At the nursing station, she stated that she left Town B because she was scared of her mother’s boyfriend, Mr. C. She reported she had been sexually abused by him. Her mother decided to stay with him and left her alone with him. − On February 14, 2018, the adolescent was entrusted to a foster family under immediate protective measures. − On March 6, 2018, the Director was informed by the foster family that they were leaving for few days. The adolescent wished to stay with her boyfriend.

This plan was not accepted and several options were proposed, including staying with a friend or staying at the foster mother's house in her absence. She decided to stay at F’s place with her boyfriend D, by herself. − On March 12, 2018, she asked for the applicant’s help because the night before, her foster mother was intoxicated by alcohol and would have yelled at her. The adolescent decided to go to her boyfriend’s mother’s house that night without the applicant’s authorization. − On March 13, 2018, she again decided to stay with her boyfriend without the youth protection worker’s authorization.

[ 11 ] Ms. [social worker 2]’s report, written on March 13, 2018, states that the Director is looking for a foster family but there are none available. [ 12 ] In her testimony, Ms. [social worker 2] informed the Court that the adolescent was assaulted by her boyfriend again in May 2018. He was arrested and he is currently detained. [ 13 ] We are in a situation in which the adolescent’s security and development were declared in danger because she was sexually abused and because she is the victim of psychological ill- treatment due to a form of emotional rejection by her mother.

This adolescent is highly vulnerable and can make bad choices if she does not receive guidance and structure. [ 14 ] That being said, the Director was required to either respect the order as rendered or take the proper legal recourse to have the decision overturned. Disregarding the order is not an option. [ 15 ] In the present case, the decision rendered by the Honourable Lucille Beauchemin on October 30, 2017, was disregarded without any legal attempt to submit the facts to the Court before February 14, 2018, because the adolescent was severely assaulted by her boyfriend.

The result produced an unfortunate event that cannot be rectified. She was deprived of her right to be protected. [ 16 ] Furthermore, the order under s. 76.1 rendered on February 16, 2018, entrusting the adolescent to a foster family was not respected either. The adolescent did what she wanted and nothing was done to return to Court to obtain an order to protect her.

Once again, she was the victim of violence by the same person. [ 17 ] The evidence as a whole demonstrates that the adolescent’s rights have been wronged by the Director, more specifically under s. 2.4(5) of the Youth Protection Act : 2.4 Every person having responsibilities towards a child under this Act, and every person called upon to make decisions with respect to a child under this Act shall, in their interventions, take into account the necessity: […] (5) of opting for measures, in respect of the child and the child’s parents, which allow action to be taken diligently to ensure the child’s protection, considering that a child’s perception of time differs from that of adults, and which take into consideration the following factors: (

a) the proximity of the chosen resource; (

b) the characteristics of cultural communities; (

c) the characteristics of Native communities. [ 18 ] At the hearing, the Court asked all the parties if they had comments to submit regarding the fact that the adolescent was deprived of her right to be protected.

No one had any specific comments on that regard. [ 19 ] Having considered that the adolescent’s right has been infringed, what will the remedies be? [ 20 ] Considering the fact that the adolescent experienced traumatic events that are clearly linked to the lack of measures to protect her, the Court is of the opinion that psychological services must be provided to the adolescent so that she may receive psychological follow-up care. The Court also orders that the Director of Youth Protection provide specific training to case workers regarding their duties and power to intervene under the Youth Protection Act .

APPLICABLE MEASURES [ 21 ] The recommendation of the youth protection worker, Ms. [social worker 2], is to entrust the adolescent to a foster family with the help of an external educator. [ 22 ] The evidence shows that it is impossible to return the adolescent to her mother. She clearly did not protect her daughter by choosing to stay with her boyfriend. [ 23 ] In the view of the Court, the adolescent may be entrusted to a foster family only if she respects the rules and stays there.

The presence of an external educator will be helpful to ensure that this environment is sufficiently structured and able to provide her guidance to protect herself. [ 24 ] If the adolescent refuses to accept the fact that she has to stay in a foster family and respect the rules, the situation will have to be reviewed to provide her with a more structured setting such as a group home or a rehabilitation center. [ 25 ] Currently, her ex-boyfriend, Mr. D, is detained. The adolescent will have to be protected if he is released from detention.

The Court is not in a position to make order prohibiting him from contacting her because no such request has been filed. Nevertheless, the Court will order that the adolescent not be in contact with him. [ 26 ] Finally, it is important to mention that the adolescent will turn 18 in January 2019. This short period of time will serve to give her tools to make good choices and prepare her for her future and to be a responsible and autonomous adult.

REGARDING THE DECISION TO DECLARE THAT THE CHILD’S RIGHTS HAVE BEEN WRONGED, THE COURT: [ 27 ] DECLARES that the adolescent’s rights have been wronged by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 28 ] ORDERS that psychological services be provided to the adolescent; [ 29 ] ORDERS that the Director of Youth Protection provide specific training to their case workers regarding their duties and power to intervene under the Youth Protection Act ; [ 30 ] ORDERS that a copy of this judgment be sent forthwith to the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse; REGARDING THE APPLICATION FOR REVISION, THE COURT: [ 31 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the adolescent be entrusted to a foster family; [ 33 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and the adolescent’s parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Tribunal; [ 34 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and the adolescent’s parents report in person, at regular intervals, to the Director of Youth Protection to inform him of the current situation; [ 35 ] ORDERS that the adolescent receive specific health care and health services such as follow-up care for her trauma; [ 36 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and the adolescent’s foster family receive the services of an external educator for the period deemed necessary by the professionals; [ 37 ] ORDERS that the mother remain sober in the presence of the child; [ 38 ] ORDERS that the adolescent not be in contact with Mr.

D, except under the authorization and supervision of the Director of Youth Protection; [ 39 ] ORDERS that the adolescent not be in contact with Mr.

C , including through social media; [ 40 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents seek help through Social Services for their personal issues; [ 41 ] ORDERS that contact between the adolescent and the parents be determined by the Director of Youth Protection with respect to the terms, frequency and degree of supervision; [ 42 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the adolescent and the adolescent ‘sfamily; [ 43 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X, born on […], 2001, to the Director of Youth Protection of A for the purpose of executing the order. __________________________________ RENÉE LEMOINE, J.C.Q.

Mtre Cassandra Neptune

Attorney for the youth Mtre Geneviève Apollon Attorney for the applicant Mtre Angele Tommasel Attorney for the mother Date of hearing: May 24, 2018