2012 QCCQ 4727, 2012 QCCQ 4727

Protection de la jeunesse — 12185 2012 QCCQ 4727 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] “Youth Division” No: 610-41-000490-110 610-41-000491-118 610-41-000492-116 DATE: January 25, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE MARC E.

GRIMARD, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], t.a.s., exercising her profession at the Centre Jeunesse A, having a place of business […], Town A, district A, […] Applicant and X, Y AND Z, domiciled and residing […], Town B, district A, [...] Children and A , domiciled and residing […], Town B, district A, [...] Mother and B , domiciled and residing […] , Town B, district A, [...] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Court is seized of petitions under

Section 95 YPA in order to extend a decision rendered on July 26, 2011 in the situation of three children of a same family: Z, born on [...], 2011, Y, born on [...], 2006 and X, born on [...], 2004. They were then entrusted to foster care for a period of four months with progressive reintegration in their family, as soon as the situation would allow it, and many measures were ordered to help this family for a period of one year.

The applicant now recommends to the Court to extend the placement of the children for another period of four months. [ 2 ] Because of their young age, the children are not present at the hearing but are represented; their counsel cannot make any admissions in their name but informs the Court that they want to return with their parents. The parents are present and represented; they deny most of the allegations but recognize that their children’s situation is still compromised and so agree with the recommendation.

Since the last judgment, the parents’ situation has improved but not to the point that the situation of the children is no longer compromised and that they can be return to them. [ 3 ] Both parents are on methadone treatment and had a follow-up with Mrs. [Social Worker 2], a drug and alcohol addiction counsellor for the Centre A. Mrs. [Social Worker 2] met Mrs. A on three occasions and Mr. B twice. Their file was closed on October 19, 2011, as there was no communication between the parties since the month of July.

The parents mentioned to the Court that they are still taking their methadone. [ 4 ] On October 21, 2011, the mother was arrested in [Province A] because she had failed to appear in Court regarding charges of theft that occurred in May 2011. She was detained until October 24 in Town C. [ 5 ] The parents can visit Z every day for a period of two hours. X and Y, who are fostered by their aunt, have sleepover at their parents’ place on Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday, and go there every afternoon after school to do their homework, have dinner and be prepared for bed.

They return at their aunt’s place to sleep. [ 6 ] The parents have difficulty respecting the

schedule for meeting their children, such as sometimes not visiting them, being late or leaving before the time allowed. Mr. B has failed to attend all the scheduled meetings with the worker as for Mrs. A, her attendance and punctuality is questionable. [ 7 ] Mr. C, foster home for Z since June 2011, testifies that the parents sometimes do not show up or are late to see their daughter. Nevertheless, he describes the parents as being caring and gentle with the child. Last month, they were upset with Mr. C and that situation created a stress for his wife.

For this reason, they do not want to foster Z anymore. [ 8 ] Overall, both parents have a good relationship with their children and look for their wellbeing. Unfortunately, they have their own issues and they will have to continue to receive services that can help them. They will have to understand that they must be more

collaborative. [ 9 ] As Mr. C and his wife confirm that they cannot foster Z anymore, she will have to be transferred in another foster home. Even though the parents still have their difficulties, it is in the best interest of Z to be entrusted to them and not to another foster family. The evidence reveals that the parents have the parental skills to take care of Z. They will not have the stress of having the children all the time, as X and Y will continue to be entrusted to their aunt with the same conditions.

FOR THESES REASONS, THE COURT: GRANTS the petitions; MAINTAINS that the situation of Z, born on [...], 2011, Y, born on [...], 2006 and X, born on [...], 2004 is compromised under the Youth Protection Act; ENTRUSTS the child Z to her parents; ENTRUSTS the children Y and X to a foster family, being their aunt Mrs.

D, with progressive reintegration with their parents if the situation allows it; ORDERS that all contacts between the parents and their children Y and X be supervised by the Centre Jeunesse with a calendar of visits, depending on the children’s best interest, and that the modalities and frequency be determined by the DYP worker; ORDERS • that a person from the Centre Jeunesse A provide aid, counselling and assistance to the children and to their parents, • that the children not be in the presence of someone who consumes drugs or alcohol (parents included), • that the parents participate in a follow-up with the drug and alcohol counsellor for as long as judged necessary by the professional, • that the parents receive the health services required due to their situation (methadone treatment), • that the parents ensure that their children receive all necessary health and mental health services required by their respective situation, • that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court and that they report at least once a week and when requested to do so to the director on the evolution of the situation; AUTHORIZES all professionals involved with this family to exchange information regarding the children and the parents’ situation; FIXES the duration of the measure at one year, except for the placement; ORDERS any peace officer to collaborate for the purpose of executing this enactment; ENTRUSTS the children’s situation to the director who shall then see that the measure is carried out. __________________________________ Marc E.

Grimard, J.C.Q. M e Julie Lemire Counsel for the applicant M e Jean-François Lacasse Counsel for the children M e Peggy Warolin Counsel for the parents Date of hearing: December 8, 2011