2011 QCCQ 9998, 2011 QCCQ 9998

Protection de la jeunesse — 114083 2011 QCCQ 9998 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division N o : 635-41-000423-118 DATE: July 21, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF : X, born on […], 1999 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A, C.Y.P.C., Quebec, district A Petitioner and A, residing and domiciled in town A, Quebec, district A Mother and B, residing and domiciled in town A, Quebec, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 (1) Y.P.A. , chap.

P-34.1 R.S.Q. ) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] [The social worker 1], delegate of the Director of Youth Protection of the A, seizes the Court with a petition asking to review the last decision rendered concerning X, 12 years old. In the last judgment, Judge Louis Grégoire declared the security and development of the child in danger and he ordered his placement in a foster home until the end of the school year, with reintegration in his family when the situation will allow it.

Now, the social worker asks that the child be entrusted in a reception centre for a period of three months with a social follow-up for him and his parents for a period of six months. [ 2 ] At the hearing, Me Denis Trottier represents the child and Me Alexandre Simon, the petitioner.

The parents are present in the Courtroom in town A as does Me Denis Trottier, the child's lawyer. [ 3 ] The parents admit all the allegations and agree with the recommendations made by the social worker. [ 4 ] The child admits most of the facts and also agrees with the recommendations. [ 5 ] A revision report is filed in evidence. [ 6 ] The evidence reveals that the behavioural problems of X are still present and that his situation is even deteriorated. In fact, the child is more aggressive with his parents and the school staff.

Last May 30, he brought a plastic gun at school, shot plastic balls on a dog and pointed it against the vice-principal. He was suspended from school until June 6. On June 6, he was reintegrated, but that day, he assaulted a classmate with an electric wire and was displaying aggressive behaviour at school. Later on, the same day, the child broke the light of the social worker's car with a wood stick and was aggressive towards his parents and the social worker.

The parents are overwhelmed by the situation. [ 7 ] The child was then placed provisionally in foster homes and he has to be moved twice because of his behaviour. Since May 17, the child is entrusted in a rehabilitation centre and his situation is improving. [ 8 ] The evidence reveals that the parents are able to respond to X's physical basic needs, but they need to develop their authority and establish structures at home. They need support to do so and they agree to receive guidance and counselling. [ 9 ] Considering the evidence, [ 10 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT : [ 11 ] GRANTS the petition;

[ 12 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are still in danger; [ 13 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted in a reception centre for a period of three months, starting June 23, 2011, with reintegration with his parents; [ 14 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and his parents for a period of six months; [ 15 ] ORDERS the child and his parents to collaborate with the delegate of the Director of Youth Protection in order to put an end to the previous situation; [ 16 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to supervise all the visits of the child in his family; [ 17 ] RECOMMENDS that X attends an individual psychotherapy for the next six months; [ 18 ] ORDERS any police officer to collaborate in the execution of the present judgment; [ 19 ] ENTRUSTS the child's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing this enactment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Me Alexandre Simon, attorney for the petitioner Me Denis Trottier, attorney for the child Date of hearing: June 23, 2011