2017 QCCQ 17178, 2017 QCCQ 17178

Protection de la jeunesse — 177662 2017 QCCQ 17178 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001966-164 DATE: October 20, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on [...], 2012 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in City A, district A Applicant and A, residing and domiciled in City A, district A Mother and B, detained in Saint-Jérôme detention center, district of Terrebonne Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (sections 95 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 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection A (D.Y.P.) asks the Court to review and to extend the decision rendered on November 9, 2016 by the undersigned concerning the situation of X, 5 years old. [ 2 ] The applicant, Mrs. [Social Worker 1], now asks that the child remain placed in the foster family or Mrs. C until February 23, 2018.

Meanwhile, the applicant wants to elaborate a life plan for the child if the parents’ situation does not improve significally. [ 3 ] At the hearing, the parents are present assisted by Me Cassandra Neptune and Me Marianne Léonard. Me Angèle Tommasel represents the child and Me Aubrée Coutanson the applicant. [ 4 ] Both parent admit most of the allegations and they agree with the recommendations included in the revision report filed in evidence. It is proved that the child remain in the same foster family since the last court hearing. She is doing very well with Mrs. C.

She gets along very well with the other children in the family. The child is now more secure with the foster mother. [ 5 ] In April and May 2017, both parents were released from detention and returned to live in City A. [ 6 ] While detained, the father completed the Center A program and he succeeded to maintain his sobriety for eight months. He is able to seek help through social services and to express his struggle with alcohol.

The father was able, since the last court hearing, to maintain contacts over the phone with the child. [ 7 ] Last June 17, 2017 the father was arrested for driving a car under the influence of alcohol and was detained for a while. Now he has conditions to respect. [ 8 ] The mother’s situation is quite similar as the old’ one. She still consume alcohol on a regular basis but now she is motivated and wants to improve. She is a loving and affectionate mother, and would be a fit parent if she would address her issues. She offers good collaboration with the social worker.

The mother receives good support from her family. They help her when in July the child came for a visit of four days with the mother. [ 9 ] Considering the motivation of the parents to change their way of life, work all their issues, maintain closed relationship with their daughter, the Court agrees with the recommendations. FOR THOSE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 10 ] GRANTS the motion;

[ 11 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2012 are still in danger; [ 12 ] ORDERS her placement in a foster family until February 23, 2018; [ 13 ] RECOMMENDS that the foster family be the one of Mrs.

C; [ 14 ] ORDERS the D.Y.P. to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her parents until February 23, 2018; [ 15 ] RECOMMENDS the parents to seek help through social services or any other organisation concerning their alcohol, drug and personal issues; [ 16 ] ORDERS the D.Y.P. to fances and to supervises the contacts between the child and her parents as for the modalities, the frequency and the degree of supervision; [ 17 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the D.Y.P. who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Me Angèle Tommasel Attorney for the child Me Aubrée Coutanson Attorney for the applicant Me Cassandra Neptune Attorney for the mother Me Marianne Léonard Attorney for the father Date of hearing: August 16, 2017