2011 QCCQ 14037, 2011 QCCQ 14037

Protection de la jeunesse — 115169 2011 QCCQ 14037 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division N os : 635-41-000357-100, 635-41-000358-108 and 635-41-000359-106 DATE: October 4, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF : X, born on […], 2006 Y, born on […], 2000 Z, born on […], 1996 [Social worker 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., Quebec, district A Petitioner and A, residing and domiciled in A town, Quebec, district A Mother and B, residing and domiciled in A town, Quebec, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 (par. 1) Y.P.A. , chap.

P-34.1 R.S.Q. ) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Mrs Amélie Beaulieu, delegate of the Director of Youth Protection of the A, C.Y.P.C., seizes the Court with three motions for prolongation of the measures previously ordered on September 14, 2010. She asks that the children remain with the parents at the conditions that the parents seek for their alcohol consumption problems and that both parents collaborate actively with her for the next four months. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the mother and the two oldest sons are present.

The children are represented by Me Denis Trottier and Me Alexandre Cimon represents the petitioner. [ 3 ] The majority of the allegations are admitted, and even if the mother agrees with the recommendations, her oldest son Z disagrees. [ 4 ] A revision report is filed and the social worker testifies. The youth Z also explained his point of view. [ 5 ] The parents still display alcohol related problems and violence problems. The children have to attend their grandmother's or relatives' home to avoid contact with their parents when they consume.

The mother is motivated to attend therapy in the following months and collaborates with the social worker. The father is more reluctant. He would beneficiate of the counselling the social worker might provide him.

Z would be more incline to meet the social worker if he would be accompanied by his father. [ 6 ] The whole family needs to improve their communication and discuss of the problems. [ 7 ] Considering that the mother and the oldest son are ready to collaborate, [ 8 ] Considering that Y has not been psychologically evaluate yet and urgently needs to be, [ 9 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT : [ 10 ] GRANTS the petitions; [ 11 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X, Y and Z are still in danger; [ 12 ] MAINTAINS the children with the parents;

[ 13 ] PROBIHITS the parents to consume or be under the influence of alcohol and any other intoxicating substances in presence of their children; [ 14 ] ORDERS the parents to beneficiate of a therapy or help for their problem of alcohol abuse; [ 15 ] ORDERS the parents to meet with the social worker once every two weeks and to collaborate actively with her; [ 16 ] ORDERS the parents to ensure the children a regular attendance at school; [ 17 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide a psychological follow-up to Y and all the medical services the children might need; [ 18 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the parents and the children for a period of four months; [ 19 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to make surprise visits at home; [ 20 ] ORDERS any police officer to collaborate in the execution of the present judgment; [ 21 ] ENTRUSTS the children's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing this enactment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Me Alexandre Cimon, attorney for the petitioner Me Denis Trottier, attorney for the children Date of hearing: August 30, 2011