2022 QCCQ 14330, 2022 QCCQ 14330

Protection de la jeunesse — 228843 2022 QCCQ 14330 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF […] TOWN OF […] « Youth Division » N o : 450-41-008207-228 DATE : November 16, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF : HONORABLE CATHERINE BROUSSEAU, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF THE YOUTH : X Born on […], 2007 -and- [Social Worker 1], person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the CIUSSS A, working at […].

Applicant -and- A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ DECISION ON AN APPLICATION FOR PROTECTION (Sections 38 and 75 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A.). CONTEXT

[ 1 ] Since February 2021, the Director of Youth Protection (Director) has been intervening in X's situation on the grounds of educational neglect and serious behavioral disturbance. [ 2 ] Indeed, X (15 ½ years old) can run away during the night, making false accusations to police officer, provoking and being verbally abusive towards his parents. The parents, especially the mother, are overwhelmed by the situation. However, the parents have different ways of dealing and intervening with X. [ 3 ] On September 2021, the parties signed an agreement on voluntary measures for a period of six months.

X is entrusted to his father and contacts between the mother and his son are allowed. [ 4 ] However, since the signature of this agreement, X is often absent from school and refuses to respect the rules at home.

The services of an external educator were offered, but X refused to collaborate. [ 5 ] In January 2022, the delegate met with the father and X to discuss the possibility of the latter being entrusted to the rehabilitation center (Organism A). [ 6 ] On February 10, 2022, following a refusal by the father that the youth go to his girlfriend's house, a fight broke out and required the intervention of the police. The father then admitted to be overwhelmed by his son's behavior. [ 7 ] On February 16, 2022, the youth was placed in a rehabilitation center (Organism

A) on immediate protective measures. [ 8 ] In view of X's increasing problematic behavior, the Director applied to the Court for provisional measures to have X entrusted to a rehabilitation center. [ 9 ] At the hearing of the provisional measures on March 3, 2022, the youth made commitments. He agreed to go to school full-time and abide by his father's rules, including a curfew. He also consented not to argue with his father, not to use drugs, to take

part in a psychological evaluation and to follow the recommendations made to him, in order to avoid his placement. [ 10 ] In this context, the Court agrees to give X one last chance and entrusted him to his father. [ 11 ] Until August 2022, X has met his commitments. However, since September 2022, the situation has been deteriorating. He has been suspended from school and refuses to do school online.

Since August 5, 2022, he refuses to meet the Director and does not want to collaborate in the follow-up with an external educator. [ 12 ] The Director still requests that the youth be entrusted to a rehabilitation center for a period of six (6) months. POSITION OF THE PARTIES [ 13 ] Although parents admitted having some arguments with X and that the youth may have some difficulties in managing his emotions, they consider that this is normal for a teenager and that the Director's assistance is not required. [ 14 ] X also opposed the Director's request. He doesn't want to be “split from his family”.

He mentions that if he was unable to return to school after his suspension, it is due to a lack of school staff. He says he is always ready to start a follow-up for the management of his emotions. As for conflicts with his parents, he believes that this kind of thing happens in all families. [ 15 ] The Court rendered judgment on the bench in accordance with the conclusions sought by the Director. Here are the reasons for this decision. ANALYSIS [ 16 ] This is the second intervention by the Director in X's situation.

In 2019, the Director intervened due to educational neglect as X had behavioral difficulties both at school and at home. However, the file was closed in February 2020 since the parents were committed to continue follow-ups with the CSSS. [ 17 ] At the hearing, the parents stand together and defend their son “tooth and nail”. According to them, the Director brought them nothing but trouble.

They therefore ask that the Director leave their lives and that of their son. [ 18 ] However, the evidence reveals that they are the first to call the Director when the situation escalates and that they are no longer able to manage the teenager's problematic behaviors. [ 19 ] Moreover, contrary to what parents and X claim, what happens at home does not reflect the daily lives of all families. [ 20 ] The Court noted that X witnessed significant conflicts between his parents, including physical altercations requiring police intervention. [ 21 ] Moreover, his relationship with his parents has always been punctuated by ups and downs.

Indeed, when pushed to the limit, the parents can easily mention no longer wanting to have anything to do with X and threatened to sign away their parental rights. [ 22 ] As far as the youth is concerned, he has made commitments that he has not maintained. The Court did not ask for perfection, but X stretched the elastic to the maximum and today the line must be drawn. The youth needs a framework that only the rehabilitation center can provide. [ 23 ] Considering the problems of the father to manage his emotions, he must also work on his difficulties before he can regain

custody of his son. The relationship between parents and the youth, and more particularly with the mother, must also be worked on. [ 24 ] The Court sees a lot of potential in X and wants to give him the chance to live in an environment that will allow him to develop his autonomy and ensure his future. [ 25 ] The present judgment reflects the observations made by the Court on the bench.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 26 ] GRANTS the present application; [ 27 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the youth X are in danger on the grounds of educational neglect and serious behavioural disturbance; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the youth X be entrusted to a rehabilitation center; [ 29 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE of the Director of Youth Protection’s intention to clarify X’s life project; [ 30 ] AUTHORIZES , in the youth’s favor, contacts with his mother, after agreement with the Director of Youth Protection; [ 31 ] AUTORIZES , in the youth’s favor, contacts with his father, after agreement with the Director of Youth Protection; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the youth attends a school, except for medical reason; [ 33 ] ORDERS that the parents and the youth take an active

part in the measures to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of X are in danger; [ 34 ] ORDERS that a person who works for an establishment or organization provides aid, counsel and assistance to the youth X and his family, for a period of six (6) months; [ 35 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth X to the Director of Youth Protection to see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ CATHERINE BROUSSEAU, J.C.Q. M e Émilie Gélineau For the Director of Youth Protection M e Noémie Pitre For the youth Mrs. A Mother Mr. B Father Date of hearing : Novembre 16 th , 2022 Last exhibits : D-1 to D-5;