2011 QCCQ 9015, 2011 QCCQ 9015

Protection de la jeunesse — 112192 2011 QCCQ 9015 JL3389 QUÉBEC COURT CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT [...] « Youth Division »

N° : 525-41-024034-100 DATE : March 15 nt , 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING JUDGE : THE HONOURABLE MICHÈLE LEFEBVRE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ In the matter of: X Born on […] 1999 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], in her capacity as person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A applicant - and - A , the mother B , the father respondents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (section 38 Y.P.A.) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The present judgment confirms in writing the decision rendered orally at the hearing held on March 15 th , 2011. [ 2 ] The Court is seized in conformity with

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act with a demand that the security or development of X and her sibling be declared to be in danger for the reasons alleged in paragraph 3 of the motion. [ 3 ] Essentially, le Director of Youth Protection sustains: 3.1 the child usually resides with her parents and at least five (5) other siblings in the home; 3.2 the atmosphere in the home is extremely chaotic with verbal arguments, conflictual altercations and yelling on a regular basis; 3.3 at times, the interaction between the older children escalated to physical altercations; 3.4 at times, the older children were becoming physically aggressive toward the mother and in the past month, she went to the hospital with broken ribs following a physical altercation with another child; 3.5 the parents acknowledge that the home is chaotic and that at times, the situation between family members escalates to physical confrontations; 3.6 the child states that she has witnessed conjugal violence between the parents; 3.7 the father has a longstanding alcohol addiction; 3.8 the family acknowledges that the father drinks in the home on a regular basis and then sleeps most of the day;

3.9 the father suffers from depression for which he is not treated; 3.10 the child is observed to have poor hygiene, clothing that is either soiled or too small; 3.11 at times, the child is ostracized from her peers due to her poor hygiene; 3.12 the child states she is only permitted to bathe once per week; 3.13 on December 2 nd , 2010, immediate protective measures were invoked and extended by the Court on December 6 th , 2010 for five (5) working days; 3.14 presently, ongoing concerns exist regarding the home environment; 3.15 a family friend, Mrs.

C has been assessed as an entrustment party and she is willing to care for the child and sibling at this time; [ 4 ] With the consent of the parties the Court proceeded to a joint hearing for the child and her sibling. [ 5 ] The Director of Youth Protection is recommending that both children be entrusted to their parents with aid, counsel and assistance for a period of one (1) year, and that measures be applied in order to correct the situation, as appears in the Court record. [ 6 ] The father, while informed of his right to be represented or assisted by attorney, chose to proceed without attorney and declared to be in agreement with the measures proposed by the Director of Youth Protection as appears in the Court record. [ 7 ] The mother, through her attorney, declared that she was in agreement with all the measures proposed by the Director of Youth Protection, as appears in the Court record. [ 8 ] The child's attorney, declared that he was in agreement with all the measures proposed by the Director of Youth Protection, as appears in the Court record. [ 9 ] By consent and to serve as evidence, the Director of Youth Protection filed the following documents: D-1 Birth certificate; D-2: Court report, signed by [Social Worker 1], dated January 6 th , 2011; D-3: Substance abuse assessment of the father signed by Nazim Khan and dated December 21 st 2010 (filed under

section 294.1 C.c.p.; D-4: Psychological assessment of the mother dated January 11 th , 2011, written by Dr. Catherine Cloutier; D-5: Psychological assessment of the father dated January 11 th , 2011, written by Dr. Catherine Cloutier; D-6: Expertise médicale psychiatrique de madame A, dated February 8 th , 2011 by Dre. Ginette Lavoie, filed under

section 294.1 C.c.p.; D-7: Addendum to court report dated March 8 th , 2011, written by Chad Caterson; [ 10 ] By consent and to serve as evidence, the mother's attorney filed the following document: M-1: Response to the draft court report; [ 11 ] By consent and to serve as evidence, the father filed the following document: P-1: References; [ 12 ] By consent and to serve as evidence, the child's attorney filed the following document: E-1: Letter from ; [ 13 ] ANALYSIS OF THE EVIDENCE AND DECISION [ 14 ] The Court finds from the evidence that the parents have eight (8) children, most of them living at home.

The father has an alcohol problem, does not work, is depressed and does not help around the house. The mother is overwhelmed by the whole situation and consequently the youngest children Y (12 years old) and (6 years old) have suffered neglect and been exposed to numerous altercations. [ 15 ] The children were placed temporarily. The parents accepted to submit themselves to psychological assessments.

In addition, the father underwent a substance abuse assessment and the mother, a psychiatric expertise. [ 16 ] Since the involvement of the Director of Youth Protection, the father has abstained from drinking and is being followed as an out-patient at A Hospital. [ 17 ] Different services were put in place, the family is receiving family counselling services from the A and the parents are cooperative. The children were returned home. [ 18 ] The parents agree to continue to collaborate with the different services recommended.

[ 19 ] Therefore, having received the admissions of the parties, taken into consideration the reports submitted, the Court concludes that the allegations have been proven to its satisfaction and permit the measures to be applied. [ 20 ] CONSEQUENTLY, AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 21 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 22 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are endangered within the meaning of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 23 ] IN VIRTUE OF THE POWERS CONFERRED UPON THE COURT BY

SECTION 91 OF THE YOUTH PROTECTION ACT: [ 24 ] ORDERS that both children remain entrusted to the care of their parents; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the parents ensure that the children are not exposed to any verbal or physical agression; [ 26 ] ORDERS the father to collaborate and participate and follow through with the recommendations from his substance abuse assessment with Nazim Khan; [ 27 ] TAKES NOTE that the father is presently being followed as an outpatient at A and that he intends to continue this outpatient follow-up; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the mother follow through with the recommendations from the psychiatric assessment of Dr.

Lavoie and namely, that she continue with her individual counselling; [ 29 ] ORDERS that both parents and the children continue to collaborate with the family counselling that they are receiving; [ 30 ] ORDERS that parents collaborate and participate in services offered by A Centres as well as outside community resources that could be set up; [ 31 ] ORDERS that the parents collaborate with the social intervention, including allowing the delegate to attend home visits; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the parents ensure that the children are clean and properly dressed; [ 33 ] RECOMMENDS the father undergo random alcohol testing at the request of the Director of Youth protection; [ 34 ] AUTHORIZES the Director of Youth Protection to exchange pertinent and necessary information with the professionals involved with the family; [ 35 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the children and their family; [ 36 ] THE WHOLE for a period of one (1) year. [ 37 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection of A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. [ 38 ] ORDERS the execution of the present judgment by any peace officer, if necessary;.

SIGNED AT TOWN A __________________________________ MICHÈLE LEFEBVRE, J.C.Q. M e Isabelle Loranger Attorney for the applicant M e Michel Leclerc Attorney for the children M e Alexandre Lenis Attorney for the mother Judgment rendered orally on March 15 nt , 2011 ML/mlm