2016 QCCQ 11610, 2016 QCCQ 11610

Protection de la jeunesse — 165042 2016 QCCQ 11610 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 614-41-000051-153 614-41-000055-154 614-41-000052-151 614-41-000056-152 614-41-000053-159 614-41-000057-150 614-41-000054-157 DATE: August 31, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER J.Q.C. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2012 Y , born on [...], 2002 Z , born on [...], 2004 A , born on [...], 2008 B, born on [...], 2006 C , born on [...], 2009 D , born on [...], 2002 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A Health and Social Services A, working in Town A, A district (Quebec) […] Applicant and E , residing and domiciled in Town A, A district (Quebec) […] Mother and F , residing and domiciled in Town A, A district (Quebec) […] Father of X, Z, A, B and C and G , residing and domiciled in Town A, A district (Quebec) […] Father of Y and D ______________________________________________________________________ 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 asks the Court to declare the security or development of Y, born on [...], 2002, Z, born on [...], 2004, A, born on [...], 2008, B , born on [...], 2006, C, born on [...], 2009, and D, born on [...], 2002, in danger pursuant to sections 38 b) 1° iii, b) 2° and

c) of the Youth Protection Act . Concerning X, born on [...], 2012,

section 38 e) 2° of the Youth Protection Act is added. [ 2 ] If the Court concludes in such a way the Director of Youth Protection asks it to entrust B, A, X and C to their parents and Y and D to their mother. As for Z who lives with his aunt the Director of Youth Protection asks the Court to entrust the child to his aunt until he reaches the age of majority. [ 3 ] The mother and one of the fathers, F, are present and represented. They do not challenge the motions and agree with the Director of Youth Protection’s recommendations for the applicable measures. [ 4 ] The children are present and represented.

They do not challenge the motions and agree with Director of Youth Protection’s recommendations for the applicable measures. [ 5 ] One of the fathers is absent and not represented. G is not involved in any of his children’s life and this for many years. F acts as a father for Y and D since 2002. Mr G has no contact with his children and is not in touch with the Director of Youth Protection. He has not show up in Court for any hearing for at least four years. The motion was not served upon to the father. [ 6 ] Considering all the circumstances the Court allows the parties to proceed even if the father is absent.

This decision is made in the children’s best interest. The facts [ 7 ] The Court considers the following facts as proven by preponderant evidence.

[ 8 ] On March 22, 2016, Justice Jean Gravel took judicial notice of the statement of the parents to the effect that they acknowledge that the security or development of their children was in danger pursuant to the Youth Protection Act . There was no admission in support of that statement. The inquiry on the applicable measures did not take place on that date and was postponed on July 6, 2016. In the meantime the Court ordered « interim measures » and entrusted the children to a foster home.

However the Court has never declared the security or development of those children compromised. [ 9 ] These measures are difficult to qualify. If they are provisional measures they exceed the maximum legal limit. If they are applicable measures they were ordered without holding an inquiry and without any written judgment.

However the Court asked the parties to proceed on the security or development part and if necessary on the applicable measures. [ 10 ] The family is known by the Director of Youth Protection for many years now. [ 11 ] On December 1 st , 2015, the mother and F (« the father ») got into an argument and had a fight in a hotel room in Town C. They were highly intoxicated. The police had to intervene and break into the room. [ 12 ] The mother had a cut on her hand and the room was messy. One of the children X was asleep and he woke up because of the commotion.

The maternal aunt who was present took the child to the washroom to prevent him from seeing the event. The child was crying. [ 13 ] The next day the Director of Youth Protection received a report because the mother was in the hospital in Town C intoxicated by alcohol and admitting using cocaine. The father was arrested. X and the maternal aunt remained at the women shelter in Town C. [ 14 ] On December 3, 2015, the Director of Youth Protection took immediate protective measures.

On December 8, 2015, the Court entrusted all the children in foster home for a maximum period of 30 days and extended that period for another 30 days. The hearing pursuant

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act for all the children was set on February 10, 2016. On that date the Court postponed the hearing on March 22, 2016, and ordered the statu quo for the measures. [ 15 ] On December 4, 2015, the Director of Youth Protection met the parents. They admitted they relapsed by taking drugs notably at the Town C Inn. The mother admitted the she went to the hospital because of conjugal violence. She admitted as well that she was drinking during her pregnancy. [ 16 ] The parents were agreeing with the Director of Youth Protection’s recommendations for the children’s situation.

They said that they wanted to work on themselves to have their children back with them. [ 17 ] Since then the parents have taken an active role in seeking support for themselves from different resources. [ 18 ] The parents received a special recognition during the Community General Assembly meeting with the Chief and Council present.

The parents still attend the Alcohol Anonymous meetings when they take place. [ 19 ] The parents said they learned a lot about couples communication, how to respect one another and to interact with their children. [ 20 ] The parents have been collaborative with the Director of Youth Protection. The unannounced visits went well. The parents still seek support from the Director of Youth Protection but from other professionals as well. • The children [ 21 ] All of the children have done well academically.

X continues to attend full time day care without any difficulty. [ 22 ] The transition between foster care and home has been smooth except for X who had difficulties returning to care. Although all of the children have done well in care, they want to go home except for Z who requests to remain in the care of his aunt. [ 23 ] B the second eldest son was acting up in school. His father had to support him by going to the school and sit with him. As a result the child is progressively improving and doing well in his academic. His behaviour has significantly improved as well.

The teacher has noticed a positive change in B’s behaviour which is attributed to the ongoing commitment of the parents. • Z [ 24 ] Z lives with his aunt H since he is 2 years old. He is bonded to her. [ 25 ] The aunt agrees to have the child with her until he reaches the age of majority. He is a quiet boy who is very easy to take care of. [ 26 ] Z wants to live with his aunt and is very happy with her. [ 27 ] Up until now the child is a bit reluctant for an unknown reason to have contacts with his parents and his siblings.

The Director of Youth Protection will have to work with the child and his family in order to restore those contacts progressively. Decision [ 28 ] As a starting point the parents declare that they have worked and still work very hard to maintain their sobriety and improve their situation as adult beings and parents. They will be very happy to have their children back with them. [ 29 ] They acknowledge that the security or development of the children is still compromised and they made admissions to that

effect.

They agree with the Director of Youth Protection’s recommendations for the applicable measures and acknowledge that they need the Youth Protection services for a period of six months to maintain their achievements. [ 30 ] The parents agree as well with the Director of Youth Protection’s recommendations concerning Z and respect the child’s position. [ 31 ] Although the parents have done very well, the Director of Youth Protection requests further involvement to support the parents and the children and ensure that the parents maintain the gain that have been made. [ 32 ] Given the evidence as a whole the Court concludes that the security or development of Y, born on [...], 2002, Z, born on [...], 2004, A, born on [...], 2008, B , born on [...], 2006, C, born on [...], 2009, and D, born on [...], 2002, are compromised pursuant to sections 38 b) 1° iii, b) 2° and

c) of the Youth Protection Act . Concerning X, born on [...], 2012, the Court comes to the same conclusion pursuant to sections 38 b) 1° iii, b) 2°,

c) and e) 2° of the Youth Protection Act . [ 33 ] The Court concludes as well that the Director of Youth Protection’s recommenda-tions concerning applicable measures are reasonable appropriate and in the children’s best interest. The Court will entrust B, A, X and C to the care of their parents. [ 34 ] As for Y and D the Court wants to correct the verbal order made on July 6, 2016, to properly reflect the Court’s intention at the time of the hearing. The Court then entrusts Y and D to the care of their mother. [ 35 ] The Court entrusts Z to the care of his aunt H until he reaches the age of majority.

The Court orders as well psychological assessment of the child in order to clarify among other things the matter of the family contacts. For these reasons the Court: [ 36 ] Grants the motions; [ 37 ] Declares that the security or development of Y, born on [...], 2002, Z, born on [...], 2004, A, born on [...], 2008, B , born on [...], 2006, C, born on [...], 2009, and D, born on [...], 2002, are compromised pursuant to sections 38 b) 1° iii, b) 2° and

c) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 38 ] Declares that the security or development of X, born on [...], 2012, is compro-mised pursuant to sections 38 b) 1° iii, b) 2°,

c) and e) 2° of the Youth Protection Act . [ 39 ] Orders the following measures for a period of six months; [ 40 ] Entrusts the children B, A, X and C to the care of their parents; [ 41 ] Entrusts the children Y and D to the care of their mother; [ 42 ] Strongly recommends that the parents continue to pursue counselling to address their personal issues; [ 43 ] Orders that a person working for an institution or a body provides aid, counsel and assistance to the children and the family; [ 44 ] Entrusts the child Z to the foster family of his aunt H until he reaches the age of majority; [ 45 ] orders that the contacts between Z and the parents be determined by the Director of Youth Protection as for the frequency, the modalities and Z’s wishes will be considered; [ 46 ] orders that certain attributes of parental authority concerning Z be removed from the parents and delegated to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of singing consents for education, medical, social and travel purposes including obtaining a passport; [ 47 ] orders that all health and medical services be provided to Z notably a psychological assessment and a follow-up if deemed necessary; [ 48 ] Encourages contacts between Z and his siblings, those contacts have to be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for the frequency and modalities, following Z’s wishes; [ 49 ] orders that a person working for an institution or a body provides aid, counsel and assistance to Z and the family until he reaches majority ([...], 2022); [ 50 ] Orders the police force to collaborate to the execution of this order; [ 51 ] Entrusts the situation of the children to the Director of Youth Protection who shall then see that the measures are carried out; __________________________________ Josée Bélanger, J.Q.C.

Me Gabriel Gaudreault, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Constantin Kiryakidis, attorney for the children Me Myriam Gaudreault, attorney for the parents Date of hearing: July 6, 2016