r v. B, 2011 QCCQ 2294

Protection de la jeunesse — 11209 2011 QCCQ 2294 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] “Youth chamber” No: 610-41-000431-098 DATE: January 18, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE GILLES GENDRON, JCQ ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1], t.t.s., exercising her profession at the Centre jeunesse A, having a place of business at […], town A, district A, […] Applicant v. X , domiciled and residing at […], town B, district A, […] Child v.

A, residing at A, […], town A, district A, […] Mother v. B , domiciled and residing at […], town B, district A, […] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 and 75 YPA, RSQ chap. P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] After the filing of a motion asking the Court to prolong a decision rendered by judge Nancy McKenna, JCQ, about April 6, 2010, the parties submitted a draft agreement on measures to put an end to the situation that compromises the security and the development of X, born on […], 2001.

At the audience, all parties were represented, except for the mother. [ 2 ] The draft agreement states that the consent of the parties was given in a free and enlightened manner. They acknowledged the new facts that still endanger the security and development of the child and the draft details these facts.

The measures proposed are the following: • the child will be entrusted to his father; • the contacts between the child and his mother will be supervised by the director of youth protection as to their frequency and terms; • if the situation evolves positively for the mother, the parents could eventually have a shared custody of the child after this Court agrees with that; • the mother will commit to a drug and alcohol assessment process and also in a follow-up if necessary; • the mother will not be under the influence of drugs while in the presence of the child; • the mother will not bring the child where there is drug consumption; • the parents authorize that information be shared between the different professionals working with the family; • a person working for an institution or body will provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and his parents for a period of 12 months. [ 3 ] The Court is of the opinion that these measures are likely to put an end to the situation that compromises the child’s security and development and that they respect his rights and interest.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: ORDERS the implementation of the measures mentioned in the draft agreement signed by the parties on January 13, 2011;

ENTRUST the child's situation to the director of youth protection for the execution of the present judgment. __________________________________ Gilles Gendron, JCQ M e Julie Lemire Attorney for the applicant M e Peggy Warolin Attorney for the child M e Denise Descôteaux Attorney for the father Date of hearing: January 13, 2011