2017 QCCQ 10700, 2017 QCCQ 10700

Protection de la jeunesse — 174687 2017 QCCQ 10700 JL4320 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE DE QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] CITY OF [...] « Youth Division »

N°: 450-41-005912-168 DATE: February 17, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: HONOURABLE LISE GAGNON, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE SITUATION OF THE CHILD: X born on […], 2011 -and- [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of Centre jeunesse A, working at […], Town A (Quebec), […], district A, Applicant -and- A , address unknown, -and- B , domiciled and residing at […], Town A (Quebec), […], district A, Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGEMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) considers that the security and the development of the child X is in danger for reasons of neglect and serious risk of neglect. [ 2 ] In his application for protection, the DYP justifies its intervention mainly, but not exclusively, for the following reasons: “3. […]

a) On December 21 st , 2015, the Director of Youth Protection accepted a report on the child X, who is now five years old;

b) On January 20 th , 2016, X was entrusted to his maternal aunt following the application of immediate protective measures. On January 22 nd , 2016, the child was entrusted to his maternal aunt following the signature of a provisional measure;

c) On March 10 th , 2016, the parties signed an agreement on voluntary measures for a period of one year;

d) On July 13 th , 2016, the parties signed another agreement on voluntary measures for a period of one year;

e) According to the agreement on voluntary measures, X is entrusted to his mother and has visits with his father, upon agreement with the Director of Youth Protection;

f) In the agreements on voluntary measures, the parties acknowledged the existence of a compromising situation, namely due to neglect on an educational ground;

g) At school, the child’s behaviour is problematic. He has conflictual relationships with his peers and is sometimes intimidating towards them;

h) The mother says that she has no difficulties with X at home, but on the other hand, is saying that X is a very turbulent child;

i) The mother also says that she finds it difficult to have a child and that she is never going to have another because of that;

j) The mother is using inappropriate parental techniques of intervention with X, such as threatening him to pull his pants down in public if he does not listen to her;

k) On July 11 th , 2016, the mother was still asleep when the applicant showed up at her home, at 10:00 in the morning, but X was awake;

l) During the last weeks, the applicant observed that there was not enough food in the house. One occasion, the applicant arrived at the mother’s house in the morning and witnessed that the X was eating candy for breakfast;

m) The mother’s spouse has a significant criminal record which includes offenses related to drug traffic, drug possession, possession of weapon, and manslaughter on minors;

n) The mother’s spouse was also doing drug traffic at her house;

o) At the time of the Director’s first intervention, the mother had drug use problems;

p) The mother says that she put an end to her drug use, without any professional help;

q) However, the applicant has serious doubts that the mother is still using drugs;

r) The mother lacks of transparency with the applicant. She is denying almost every negative information reported by third parties or by the child;

s) The mother had agreed never to let the child be in contact with her spouse, but does not respect her commitment;

t) The child has said, on several occasions, that he has been in contact with the mother’s spouse. The mother denies the information given by the child;

u) It seems that the mother is not allowing X to discuss with the applicant about the situation at home;

v) For about a year, the father has had no contacts with X;

w) Recently, the father renewed contacts with his son;

x) The father has a significant criminal record;

y) The father is currently under warrant due to the fact that he has not completed his discontinuous prison sentence;

z) In the past, the father has undertaken a therapy because he was struggling with alcohol consumption issues; aa) In July 2016, the applicant was informed that the father had relapsed in his alcohol and drug use; bb) The father was hospitalised on two occasions in three months following an excessive use of speed and heroine;” [ 3 ] Since this application, the situation has evolved. [ 4 ] Today, the DYP recommends that the child be maintained in the care of his maternal aunt, Mrs C, until June 30 th , 2017, with a possible reintegration with his mother during that period. [ 5 ] As for the father, the DYP recommends that the contacts be supervised. [ 6 ] The DYP’s intervention is not contested, neither his recommendations. [ 7 ] In brief, following the deposit of the application, the mother has taken things seriously.

She understands that she has to be honest and open with the services. The mother knows that hiding the truth has been putting her child in jeopardy in the past and does not intend to do it again. [ 8 ] The mother recognizes that her way of living (partners with criminal records, consumption of drugs and instability), have been having an impact on her child.

[ 9 ] The mother is now seeing Dr Fortier and agrees that the DYP be informed of the evolution of her situation. She has also agreed to receive services from Mrs Line Auger (CSSS), with whom she has a good relationship. She collaborates well. [ 10 ] Mr. D, her ex-partner, is not around anymore. The mother is also ready to look into her impulsivity problems. [ 11 ] Because of the mother’s commitment to make real changes in her life, the DYP feels that X can be reintegrated with her at the end of the school year. [ 12 ] The mother still stays in Town A. X lives with his aunt in Town B.

This is why X will be reintegrated with his mother on a full time basis only at the end of June. [ 13 ] As for the father, he was in Court at some point and did recognize his problems and was willing to make some changes. Unfortunately, his situation remains very unsettled. [ 14 ] The father was detained on different occasions and faces different accusations. He is not in Court today. He knew the date of the hearing. He doesn’t collaborate with his lawyer.

This lawyer is without news from the father despite numerous attempts to reach him. [ 15 ] Because of the positive evolution of the mother’s situation, the Court believes that the recommendations represents X’ best interest.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: GRANTS the present modified motion; DECLARES the security and the development of the child X in danger; ENTRUSTS the child X to his maternal aunt, Mrs C until June 30 th , 2017; AUTHORISES a progressive reintegration of the child with his mother during said period and to be completed by June 30 th , 2017; AUTHORIZES in favor of the child X contacts with his mother according to the modalities established with the Director of Youth Protection; AUTHORIZES in favor of the child X supervised contacts with his father according to the modalities established with the Director of Youth Protection, with the possibility to raise to supervision as per the evolution of the situation; ORDERS that a person, working for the Director of Youth Protection of the CIUSSS A or any other establishment or body, provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child X and his family for the period of one year; ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X to the Director of Youth Protection to see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ Lise Gagnon, J.C.Q.

M e Christine Loubier For the Director of Youth Protection M e Genevière Lafontaine For the mother M e Alexandre Tardif For the child Date of hearing: February 17th, 2017 Last exhibit deposit: D-9 (DYP) M-2 (mother)