2016 QCCQ 13140, 2016 QCCQ 13140

Protection de la jeunesse — 165747 2016 QCCQ 13140 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No. 614-41-000106-163 DATE: September 19, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DENISE DESCÔTEAUX J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on [...], 2015 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection delegate, in her capacity as person authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in Town A Applicant and A, residing and domiciled in Town A, Québec, District A Mother and B, residing and domiciled in Town B, Québec, District A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (sections 38 and 91, Youth Protection Act , c.

P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] [Social Worker 1], delegate of the Director of Youth Protection A, is submitting a motion to declare that the security and development of X, 1 year old, are in danger under sections 38( b )(1)(ii) and (iii) and 38(

c) of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] At the hearing, the mother was present, represented by Mtre. Myriam Gaudreault. The child was represented by Mtre. Michel Grenier, and Mtre. Camille Champeval represented the applicant.

The father was not present, although he received notification of the motion on July 18, 2016. [ 3 ] The evidence of child endangerment related to neglect and the risk of neglect consists of admissions made by the mother, as well as the various reports that were filed in the record of the Court. [ 4 ] X is the only child of this young couple, who are 22 and 19 years old respectively. [ 5 ] The couple is known by the youth protection authorities, as the child was twice placed under emergency measures because of conjugal violence and substance abuse. [ 6 ] The young child was hospitalized at the hospital centre in Val-d’Or, then transferred to the CHU Ste-Justine on May 8, 2016.

The prognosis for the future was very poor, as the child was diagnosed with meningitis caused by Haemophilus influenzae type A, initial status epilepticus, a subdural empyema and a left subdural hematona. [ 7 ] On June 30, 2016, he was transferred to the Marie Enfant rehabilitation centre in the Neurotraumatology Program.

The child benefits from intervention and stimulation in physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy and specialized education. [ 8 ] While hospitalized at Ste-Justine, the child was left alone most of the time, as the parents stayed with him on average three hours per day, despite the requests of the medical staff that they remain with the child. [ 9 ] The parents gave minimal care and attention to the child when they were with him and did not respond to his needs. The parents were asked to leave Ronald MacDonald House because of their substance abuse problems.

In addition to smelling of alcohol, the father and the mother had physical altercations at the hospital in the child’s presence. [ 10 ] The mother admitted that the father has serious substance abuse problems and that, at the time the motion was filed, she had problems as well, but she claims she has stopped drinking and using marijuana.

[ 11 ] In late June 2016, the father reportedly left the hospital to return to live in his community, and the relationship between the parties ended at that time. Since, the mother remains in Montréal and cares for her son on her own; she cooperates well with hospital authorities. In fact, since her son was admitted to the Marie Enfant rehabilitation centre in the Intensive Functional Rehabilitation Unit, the mother has been involved and puts great effort into caring for him. The report by Christèle Millard, social worker in neurotraumatology, noted that the mother’s involvement has fluctuated since mid-July.

In addition, the young mother cooperates with the health professionals. Although she is now focused on her son’s needs, she sometimes needs support to take action. [ 12 ] The end of the mother’s relationship with the child’s father is recent and remains a major risk factor in this case. Her testimony did not succeed in convincing the Court that the break-up was permanent. [ 13 ] As Ms.

Millard stated in her report, the mother must adapt to a number of major events, that is, her son’s medical condition, the DYP’s involvement, social and geographic isolation, as well as a difficult relationship with her spouse. [ 14 ] At this time, the mother is collaborating with the Director of Youth Protection and has shown interest in modifying her lifestyle. [ 15 ] Considering the child’s medical situation and his young age, he needs to be in a safe and stable environment until the mother demonstrates her capacity to remain sober and assume her role with her child. [ 16 ] After declaring the security and development of the child in danger, the Court proceeded with a hearing on applicable measures. [ 17 ] A social study was filed as evidence. [ 18 ] Considering the child’s needs, adequate and regular medical assistance is necessary, given the mother’s agreement with the measures.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 19 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 20 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X is in danger under sections 38( b )(1)(ii) and (iii) and 38(

c) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to an institution operating a hospital centre or a local community service centre so he can receive the care and assistance he needs; [ 22 ] ORDERS that contact between the child and the mother be determined by the DYP as to frequency and the terms and conditions, and encourages visits with the mother; [ 23 ] ORDERS that contact between the child and the father begin when the father shows interest in the child, and encourages visits with the child if the father shows interest and wishes to be present in his life; [ 24 ] ORDERS the father’s visits with and access to the child if the situation allows; contact will occur only under the strict condition that the father be sober and that contact be determined by the DYP as to frequency, the terms and conditions and the presence of a third party if judged necessary; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the mother participate fully with all service providers, including Marie Enfant, Cree Patient services, and Cree Special Needs Services, and ORDERS the mother to follow the recommendations made by the professionals; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the father participate fully with all service providers, including Marie Enfant, Cree Patient services, and Cree Special Needs Services, if the situation allows; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the father ensure the child is not exposed to any form of verbal or physical violence; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the parents abstain from all substances in the presence of the child, unless they are prescribed by a doctor; [ 29 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents complete a substance abuse treatment program and follow the recommendations made; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the parents ensure that the child receives all the health care and services required by his condition; [ 31 ] ORDERS that the DYP be authorized to obtain and share information on appointments, collaboration and follow-up; [ 32 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother undergo a psychological evaluation and that she follow all the recommendations made; [ 33 ] ORDERS that the DYP be authorized to obtain a copy of the psychological evaluation of the mother; [ 34 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the family for a period of one year; [ 35 ] ORDERS that the DYP be authorized to obtain and share information with all medical services involved with the child; [ 36 ] ORDERS that the parents report periodically to the DYP on the measures they apply in their own regard or in the child’s regard to put an end to the situation that endangers the security or development of the child.

__________________________________ DENISE DESCÔTEAUX J.C.Q. Mtre. Camille Champeval DYP for the [Social Services A] Attorney for the applicant Mtre. Myriam Gaudreault, avocate Attorney for the mother Mtre. Michel Grenier Gaudreault Grenier, avocats Attorney for the child Date of hearing: August 2, 2016