2016 QCCQ 16926, 2016 QCCQ 16926

Protection de la jeunesse — 167836 2016 QCCQ 16926 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] Youth Division No: 145-41-000489-150 DATE: October 5, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant -and- X born on […], 2009 Child -and- A -and- 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 (DYP) asks the Court to revise and extend the order rendered on February 22, 2016, in respect of the child. [ 2 ] At the hearing, the father is present and not represented, but he wishes to proceed without counseling. He admits the fact of the application, and he consents to the filing of the reports to value the testimony of their authors.

Furthermore, he agrees with the recommendations of the DYP. [ 3 ] The mother is not present during the hearing, even though she was duly served. The social worker also informed her about the postponement of the case to the current date. Furthermore, she did not show up at the last appointment scheduled with her. Since July 5, 2016, the social worker never heard from the mother. [ 4 ] The child is absent but duly represented.

Counsel for the child also expresses his consent with the recommendations proposed by the DYP and the filing of the reports to value the testimony of their authors. [ 5 ] The child is seven years old. She has anxiety issues and struggles with her social skills toward her peers. She needs help in order to work through her problematic. She was even enrolled in a summer camp for that purpose. [ 6 ] The involvement of the mother with the services is not consistent, and she does not participate in her child’s life. She missed many appointments concerning her follow-ups.

Every contact made between the mother, and the social worker was done mostly by email. [ 7 ] The mother seems to be nowhere to be found. In July 2016, many attempts were made to reach the mother by phone or through visits at her residence, without any success. She still struggles with her addiction issue. On July 7, 2016, she was arrested for trafficking and being in possession of an authorized weapon. [ 8 ] Since July 12, 2016, because of the situation, the previous custody arrangements between the parents could not continue. The child was entrusted completely to the father.

She feels secure with him. [ 9 ] The father is working to offer to his daughter a stable and secure home. While he is working, the maternal grandmother takes care of the child. She is doing well with him, and she is happy. The adaptation between the father and the child went fine. He is implicated in his follow-up and managed to complete his psychological evaluation.

[ 10 ] The evidence demonstrates that the child still needs a stable and secure environment. The father can provide this stability and care for his daughter. [ 11 ] Under the circumstances, the application is well founded. The suggested measures appear to be in the best interest of this child. FOR THESE REASONS AND THOSE EXPRESSED ORALLY AT THE HEARING, THE COURT: [ 12 ] GRANTS the application for revision and extension of order; [ 13 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still considered to be in danger according to

section 38 of the youth protection act ; [ 14 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to her father; [ 15 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and her mother are determined by agreement between the parties including their supervision as long as deemed necessary; [ 16 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother continues her follow-up with an addiction counsellor as long as deem necessary; [ 17 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother submits herself to random drug tests weekly; [ 18 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother completes a parental capacity and psychological evaluation; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the parents be sober at all time in presence of the child; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the parents follow-up with the youth protection worker on a regular basis; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the child and her parents actively participate in the application of the measures ordered; [ 22 ] ORDERS that a person working for an establishment provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her family until September 30, 2017; [ 23 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the DYP of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux A for the carrying out of the present order. __________________________________ CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q.

Me Louyse Andrée Lemieux for the applicant Me Réal Grenier for the child Mrs A the mother (absent) Mr B the father Date of hearing: October 5, 2016 Written judgment filed on November 8, 2016