2013 QCCQ 14404, 2013 QCCQ 14404

Protection de la jeunesse — 134971 2013 QCCQ 14404 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE DE QUÉBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001606-133 640-41-001607-131 640-41-001608-139 DATE: September 25, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born […] 2007 Y , born […] 2008 Z , born […] 2010 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A Board of Health and Social Services A, working in A, district of A Applicant A , residing and domiciled in City A, district A Mother and B , residing and domiciled in City A, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection makes an application to have the security and development of X, born[…], 2007, Y, born […], 2008 and Z, born […]2010 declared in danger pursuant to sections 38 a), 38 b) 1° (i), 38 b) 2° and 38

c) of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The mother and the father are present and represented by a lawyer. Their lawyer represents the children. [ 3 ] The parents admit that the situation of their children is compromised pursuant to the law but they disagree with the measures recommended by the applicant.

Instead they want their children back with them. [ 4 ] They both admit that: • The mother is living in the maternal grandfather's house; • The mother displays alcohol and drugs related problems; • On April 18, 2013, the mother went to the Youth Protection Office and she requested that the children Y and Z be placed in foster care; • The mother also disclosed that she did not have food and pampers for the children; • The mother disclosed that she was overwhelmed and too tired to raise the children without the support of the father. [ 5 ] The mother admits also that: • On April 19 and 20, 2013, the mother was seen intoxicated in the community; • On April 26, 2013, the Youth Protection met with the mother; • The mother displayed aggressive behaviour towards the Youth Protection worker; • On the same day, the maternal grandfather stated that he would take care of the youth X; • On May 10, 2013, the mother came to the office with the youth X as she was intoxicated; • The mother disclosed that the maternal grandfather kicked her out of his house and that he did not want to take care of the youth X anymore;

• The mother requested that the youth X be entrusted to a foster family; • The collaboration of the mother with the Youth Protection is minimal and irregular; • The father does not collaborate with the Youth Protection. [ 6 ] They both deny that: • The parents are separated and the mother is the main caregiver of the children; • The father is not involved in the life of the children; [ 7 ] At the beginning of this hearing the applicant recommends as measures that all the children be entrusted to a foster home if the Court decides that their situation is compromised pursuant to the law.

After being cross-examined by the lawyers she changed her mind and said that the children could remain with the parents with appropriate measures to help the family. [ 8 ] On May 8, 2013, the mother went to the Youth Protection office to sign a provisional agreement for Y and Z for a period of thirty days. [ 9 ] On May 31, she signed a provisional agreement for her three children. [ 10 ] On June 13, the Court ordered the provisional foster care of the three children in a foster home for a period of thirty days, that period being extended for another thirty days.

The date of this hearing was set on August 29 with the consent of the parties. [ 11 ] The applicant's testimony is vague and uncertain. While cross-examined she cannot explain many of the allegations contained in her report. Furthermore she cannot answers most of the questions asked by the lawyers. [ 12 ] During examination in chief Mrs [Social Worker 1] says that the parents don't collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection. She says also that it was impossible to contact the father because he was in the bush between April 18 and May 10.

She adds that the father never asked to visit his children when they were living in a foster home. [ 13 ] While cross-examined by the father's lawyer about the attendance of the parents at the Youth Protection office Mrs [Social Worker 1] cannot says if the father has missed any appointment. She adds that she has never directly spoken with the father.

Finally she admits that she doesn't know if the parents have ever visited their children while they were living in their foster home. [ 14 ] Because of this weak evidence and that Mrs [Social Worker 1] suddenly changed her mind concerning the applicable measures the parties discussed together and reached an agreement. [ 15 ] The agreement is the following: • Declares that the security and development of the children are in danger under the Youth Protection Act with paragraphs, 38 a), 38 b) 1° (i), 38 b) 2° and 38 c); • Orders that the three children remain with their parents; • Orders the parents to report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in their youth's regard to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the children is in danger; • Orders that the parents meet with the social worker as often as required, at least once every two weeks, except for any serious reason discussed previously by the social worker; • Orders the parents to submit to drug test by the Director of Youth Protection as often as required; • Orders the parents to remain sober at all time for a period of six months; • Permits unannounced visits to the parents residence or at any place where they are living with the children; • Orders the parents to take their children to all medical visits required by them; • Orders the parents to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection at all time; • Orders aid, counsel and assistance to the parents and the children for a period of 12 months; • Orders the police to collaborate to the execution of this enactment; • Entrusts the situation of X, born […] 2007, Y, born […] 2008 and Z […], 2010 to the Director of Youth Protection of the A Board of Health an Social Services A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. [ 16 ] The Court is of the opinion that Mrs [Social Worker 1] doesn't seem to know this family's situation.

Her testimony shows that the social follow-up was not ensured or was not ensured adequately to that family. [ 17 ] Will the parents collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of that agreement? Once again the Director of

Youth Protection has decided to trust the parents. Is he right? For these reasons the Court: [ 18 ] Declares that the security and development of X, born […] 2007, Y, born […] 2008 and Z, born […] 2010 are in danger pursuant sections 38 a), 38 b) 1° (i), 38 b) 2° and 38

c) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 19 ] Orders the implementation of the measures included in the following agreement: • Orders that the three children remain with their parents; • Orders the parents to report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regard or in their youth's regard to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the children is in danger; • Orders that the parents meet with the social worker as often as required, at least once every two weeks, except for any serious reason discussed previously by the social worker; • Orders the parents to submit to drug test by the Director of Youth Protection as often as required; • Orders the parents to remain sober at all time for a period of six months; • Permits unannounced visits to the parents residence or at any place where they are living with the children; • Orders the parents to take their children to all medical visits required by them; • Orders the parents to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection at all time; • Orders aid, counsel and assistance to the parents and the children for a period of 12 months; • Orders the police to collaborate to the execution of this enactment; [ 20 ] Recommends to the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse to evaluate the services provided to the children and the parents by the Director of Youth Protection up to now; [ 21 ] Entrusts the situation of X, born […] 2007, Y, born […] 2008 and Z, born […] 2010 to the Director of Youth Protection of the A Board of Health and Social Services A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ Josée Bélanger, J.C.Q.

Me Camille Provencher, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Yan Massé, attorney for the children Me Claude Beaudet, attorney for the mother Me Clara Egervari, attorney for the father Date of hearing: August 30, 2013