2017 QCCQ 8509, 2017 QCCQ 8509

Protection de la jeunesse — 173405 2017 QCCQ 8509 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-002068-168 DATE: February 17, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE RENÉE LEMOINE J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on [...], 2016 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in City A, District A Applicant and A , residing and domiciled in City A, District A Mother and B , residing and domiciled in City A, District A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ( sections 38 and 75 of the Youth Protection Act , CQLR c.

P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act forbids the publishing or broadcasting of information allowing 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 (D.Y.P.) submitted to the Court a motion to declare the security or the development of the child in danger because of the risk that her parents will fail to meet all her basic needs. [ 2 ] The recommendations of the D.Y.P. were to keep the child with her parents with several assistance measures, including follow- up by social services. The parents agreed with the recommendations. [ 3 ] The parents admitted their problems with alcohol.

They agreed to collaborate with the D.Y.P. and had taken all the necessary steps to receive services for their personal issues. [ 4 ] The evidence revealed the following facts. On [...], 2016, the mother gave birth at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal. The baby showed clear signs of Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder. The mother had a major issue with alcohol consumption and drank every day during her pregnancy. [ 5 ] The baby was in the intensive care ward at the Montreal Children’s Hospital. Both parents were present for the baby.

According to the social worker from the hospital, the parents were appropriate with the baby and there were no issues with alcohol. [ 6 ] In addition to Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, the medical team suspected Down syndrome. [ 7 ] The child came back to City A on October 28, 2016. The parents agreed with the placement but asked the foster mother to be the maternal grandmother. [ 8 ] After assessment, the D.Y.P. accepted the grandmother as the baby’s foster mother until the next court hearing. [ 9 ] On November 1, 2016, the D.Y.P. met with the grandmother, C, at her house.

She was very welcoming and collaborative. [ 10 ] The baby was doing well and the parents were involved daily with her care. The mother spent the whole day with her baby and the father saw her after work. They were always sober and very appropriate with the child. [ 11 ] On November 2, 2016 provisional compulsory foster care was ordered under

section 79 of the Youth Protection Act (Y.P.A.). The parents were very collaborative and expressed great acknowledgement of their issues. [ 12 ] Many times during the evaluation period, the mother had bruises on her face. She did not identify who had assaulted her, but, with the history of conjugal violence between her and Mr. B, the D.Y.P. suspected some conjugal violence between them. [ 13 ] It was clear from the evidence that the security or development of the child was in danger because of the risk that her needs

would not be met due to the alcohol consumption issues of both parents (38 b) 2 Y.P.A .). [ 14 ] The child is highly vulnerable due to her age and her medical condition. She depends on her caregivers to meet her basic and life-sustaining needs. [ 15 ] It is true that the parents displayed great interest and collaboration in D.Y.P. services. They also expressed great acknowledgement of their issues and had taken the necessary steps to stay sober during the period of placement under the care of the grandmother. [ 16 ] The Court has to consider that both parents have history with the D.Y.P. regarding the siblings.

The parents were very sad about a tragic event with their last newborn, who passed away at two-days old. The parents were intoxicated and the father fell asleep on the baby, which led to sudden death. [ 17 ] The child is very vulnerable and the Court believes that it is necessary to have a longer period under the care of the grandmother to be sure that the parents will maintain their improvement and collaboration. [ 18 ] The grandmother is a safety net and very supportive of the parents.

The parents can stay involved in the child care on a daily basis, but the responsibility of the child will remain with the maternal grandmother for few months to be sure that the significant changes that the parents have made in their lifestyles will last over time. [ 19 ] The Court recommends close follow-up by the D.Y.P. in order to support the parents and prevent any deterioration in their situation, which could put the child in danger.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 21 ] DECLARES that the security or development of X, born on [...], 2016, is in danger; [ 22 ] ENTRUSTS the child to her grandmother, C, for a period of three months with gradual reintegration with the parents as soon as the situation allows it; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the child’s parents report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply on their own regard to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is in danger; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the child’s parents take an active

part in the application of all of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the child’s parents report in person, at regular intervals, to the Director of Youth Protection to inform him of the current situation; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the parents remain sober in the presence of the child; [ 27 ] ORDERS that an educator provide services to the child and the family; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the parents remain without any violent behaviour in the presence of the child; [ 29 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents seek help through social or other services concerning their alcohol and conjugal issues, and the anger management issue in the case of the father; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the contact be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection regarding the terms and frequency if the situation does not permit immediate reintegration; [ 31 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and the child’s family and the foster family; [ 32 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate in the execution of the judgment; [ 33 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection A for the purpose of executing the order; [ 34 ] THE WHOLE, until November 30, 2017. __________________________________ RENÉE LEMOINE J.C.Q.

Mtre. Kimon Kling Attorney for the child Mtre. Aubree Coutanson Attorney for the applicant Mtre. Angèle Tommasel

Attorney for the mother Mr. B Self-represented Date of hearing: November 30, 2016