2021 QCCQ 14657, 2021 QCCQ 14657

Protection de la jeunesse — 218240 2021 QCCQ 14657 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-034520-189 Date: September 30, 2021 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on [...], 2017 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A Applicant -and- A , the mother -and- B , the father The parents JUDGMENT Sections 95 and 95.1 of the Youth Protection Act (L.R.Q., C.

P-34.1 ) 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 Court was presented with an Application for revision and extension of an order rendered by the undersigned on February 14, 2020, whereby the now four year-old child, X , was entrusted to his mother with aid, counsel and assistance, for a period of one year. [ 2 ] The Court was also presented with similar applications regarding the child’s siblings whose situations are addressed in separate judgments. [ 3 ] The facts alleged in support of the application for revision and extension dated December 14, 2020, are as follows: 3.1. the child remained in the mother’s care; 3.2. the mother was working with an educator on a weekly basis to strengthen her parental abilities and to establish a routine; 3.3. on two occasions, the mother left Y and X in the car without adult supervision while she went to do an errand; 3.4. in the beginning of the year, X had a burn on his arm and only after much prompting did the mother seek medical attention; 3.5. the mother is showing signs of instability as well as concerns with her mental health; 3.6. the home is observed to have empty bottles of alcohol lying around as well as several alcohol bottles in the refrigerator; 3.7. the mother is hoarding items in the home and has collected over 40 bins in one room which are a hazard to the child; 3.8. the child has regular contact with the father said contact having positively evolved whereby lifting the supervision; 3.9. the child responds well to his father; 3.10. the mother is adamant that she does not wish for the child to see his father despite the court order; 3.11. on December 7, 2020, the during a telephone conversation with the case worker, the mother threatened to flea with the child to [Province A] in order to stop the contact between the child and the father to occur; 3.12. on December 7, 2020, immediate protective measures were invoked and the child was entrusted to the father;

3.13. on Decemer 9, 2020, the Honourable Justice François Ste-Marie extended the immediate protective measures for a maximum period of five (5) working days (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 4 ] On December 22, 2020, the Director filed an Application for provisional measures and the Court entrusted the child to the care of his father. [ 5 ] On March 18, 2021, the mother presented an Application for provisional measures to have the child returned to her care, however, her application was dismissed and the child remained entrusted to his father. [ 6 ] On July 20, 2021, the Director presented another Application for provisional measures following the mother’s move to Town A, [Province A] with her two other children and the child remained entrusted to his father. [ 7 ] At the hearing on the merits on September 7, 2021, the Director recommends that the child remain entrusted to his father, with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, for a period of twelve months. [ 8 ] The mother, assisted by Me Ameur, opposes the proposed measures and asks that the child be returned to her care.

She also opposes the withdrawal of the exercise of certain attributes of her parental authority. [ 9 ] The father, assisted by Me Plourde, agreed to the proposed measures.

He added that he encourages contacts between the child and his mother but urges the mother to be consistent to avoid disappointing the child. [ 10 ] Me Sabik, on behalf of the child, made no admissions but approved of the measures proposed by the Director of Youth Protection. [ 11 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-17 to D-21 as evidence: D-17: Evaluation of signalement report, prepared by [Social Worker 2], dated December 18, 2020; D-18: 95 Court Report, prepared by [Social Worker 3], dated November 11, 2020; D-19: Addendum, prepared by [Social Worker 3], dated January 5, 2021; D-20: Addendum II, prepared by [Social Worker 3], dated March 12, 2021; D-21: Addnedum III, prepared by [Social Worker 1], dated August 31, 2021. [ 12 ] In

summary, the evidence clearly establishes that the child has been thriving in his father’s care since December 2020. [ 13 ] At the beginning of the entrustment, he appeared to adjust easily: The undersigned and the educators have conducted regular check-ins with X and Mr. B. X has consistently been observed to be happy and comfortable with his father. [1] [ 14 ] The father readily accepted support services to meet his son’s needs: X’s situation remained stable and he is well provided for by his father. Mr.

B is protective of his son, he is eager to learn and further develop his parenting skills. [2] [ 15 ] By August, the child was consistently observed to be happy and well-cared for: Mr. B provides X with excellent care; he is protective of his son and is always eager to learn to further develop his parenting skills. X presents as a happy, friendly and intelligent little boy; […] X continues to attend the same day care on a full-time basis. X loves daycare. The daycare reports that Mr. B is a responsible and dedicated father. There are no concerns in regards to X’s safety and development in Mr.

B’s care; [3] [ 16 ] In addition, not only has the mother chosen to move away from the child, she has been inconsistent in her contacts with him. She failed to call for his 4 th birthday and missed four scheduled video calls with her son since June 21, 2021 [4] . [ 17 ] Moreover, her demeanor during the calls is not always appropriate; she: […] continues to ask X if he wants to come and live in [Province A], if he misses and loves his mother despite Mr. [Social Worker 4] [the DYP educator] telling Ms.

A that these comments will only serve to confuse and hurt A. [5] [ 18 ] Even prior to her move to [Province A], she would not plan activities for her visits with the child despite repeated prompting from the educator [6] .

[ 19 ] The mother’s living conditions also appeared increasingly worrisome prior to her move: […] undersigned and Ms. C arrived unannounced and there was an alarming amount of alcohol and large plastic bins in the home. [7] [ 20 ] Finally, the mother repeatedly criticized and undermined the father in the child’s presence: […] Ms. A criticized Mr. B profusely in the presence of X i.e.: X’s coat is dirty, she does not like X’s haircut, his ears are dirty, his pants are too short, the child stinks etc. At all times, the undersigned verified Ms.

A’s complaints all of which were not founded. [8] [ 21 ] Under the circumstances, the evidence clearly establishes serious concerns about the mother’s commitment to the child since she has chosen to move away and has also been inconsistent in her contacts with him. [ 22 ] Equally serious concerns remain about her sensitivity to his needs, even when she is with him, given her lack of preparation for their visits, her confusing messages to the child as well as her denigrating comments about the father in his presence. [ 23 ] Asked whether she had obtained any services recommended in her parental capacity assessment, the mother responded that she was on a waiting list.

Consequently, there is no evidence of any concrete steps or effort to improve her ability to meet her child’s needs. [ 24 ] Therefore, considering that the child’s situation remains stable in his father’s care where all his needs are met, considering that the father actively facilitates contacts between the child and his mother, encouraging the child to participate, and that he is sensitive to his son’s emotional needs, the evidence clearly establishes that it is in the child’s best interest to remain entrusted to his father and to be protected from further risks of instability, especially considering the significant changes and risk factors in the mother’s life. [ 25 ] She has not only moved to another province, she has a new partner who is reluctant to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection and the couple is also expecting a child in December 2021. [ 26 ] It is also necessary to protect the child from exposure to the mother‘s new partner until such time as the Director of Youth Protection can determine that it would not negatively impact the child. [ 27 ] However, as the mother has willingly reported to the Children’s Aid Society in [Province A] and has not unduly refused to sign authorizations for the child, the request to withdraw certain attributes of parental authority is not well-founded.

Should she fail to cooperate in the future, the parties may always seize the Court.

THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 28 ] GRANTS the application in part; [ 29 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child, X , remain in danger under the Youth Protection Act ; AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE CHILD 'S INTEREST TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 30 ] ORDERS that the child remain entrusted to the care of his father; [ 31 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the child, his mother and his maternal grandmother be determined by the Director of Youth Protection, including supervision if necessary; [ 32 ] PROHIBITS contacts between the child and his step-grandfather, Mr.

D; [ 33 ] ORDERS that the mother ensure that the mother’s partner, Mr.

E, is not in contact with the child until deemed appropriate by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 34 ] ORDERS that the mother not denigrate the father or the delegate/educators in the child’s presence, and that she collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection; [ 35 ] ORDERS that the mother provide the father with the child’s vaccination booklet and passport; [ 36 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the mother benefit from support services regarding Youth Protection involvement and her mental health; [ 37 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the father follow the recommendations outlined in his parental capacity assessment dated October 19, 2019, including that he receive regular therapeutic services; [ 38 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to exchange relevant information with all treating professionals working with the family; [ 39 ] ORDERS that a person working for the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and his family; [ 40 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X , to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux A , who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 41 ] THE WHOLE for a period of twelve months.

Signed on September 30, 2021 TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. Me Esther Sterling Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Nadia Sabik Attorney for the child Me Younes Ameur Attorney for the mother Me Guylaine Plourde Attorney for the father Hearing date: September 7, 2021. TD/vl