2011 QCCQ 10406, 2011 QCCQ 10406

Protection de la jeunesse — 114050 2011 QCCQ 10406 CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC District of [...] JJ0296 COURT OF QUEBEC YOUTH DIVISION N°: 525-41-022273-098 N° : 525-41-022274-096 DATE: August 23, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE ANN-MARIE JONES, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ In the cases of: X Born on […], 2011 - and - Y Born on […], 2004 ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGEMENT

Section 95 Y.P.A. ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: Within the framework of the Youth Protection Act, no person may publish or broadcast information allowing 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. [Y.P.A. sections 11.2.1 and 135] [ 1 ] The Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of August 23, 2011, in accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the law. [ 2 ] The Court was presented with two motions for extension of orders rendered on December 10, 2010, entrusting the children to foster care for a period of one year. [ 3 ] The principal facts alleged in support of the motions are the following: • The children are progressing very well in foster care; • The mother has maintained regular contacts with the children; • The mother wishes to eventually resume care of the children, however she continues to struggle with her addiction which interferes with the use of her prescribed medication; • The mother was assessed by Center A, it was recommended that the mother participate in a twenty-eight days program, however she did not follow through; • The mother continues to experience significant difficulties in organizing herself; • Father’s contacts with the children have been inconsistent partly due to the fact that father was in Syria for extended periods of time. [ 4 ] The Director of Youth Protection recommends that the children be entrusted to the specific foster home of their aunt until their

respective age of majority and that a social follow-up be provided to the family for the same period. [ 5 ] The mother admits the majority of the facts alleged in the motion, but contests the recommended measures. The mother agrees for the children to be maintained with their aunt and uncle until June 30, 2013. The mother testifies that she has completed the program at center A and that she has abstinent from the use of drugs since June 18, 2011. [ 6 ] The mother states that she is living in an apartment owned by her father and that she now pays half the rent. Her father occasionally stays at the apartment.

She receives her children three weekends per month and the father sees them one or twice during that time. [ 7 ] The father admits certain of the facts alleged in the motions and says that he will be in a position to resume the care of his children in two years. He states that he was in Syria in February for two weeks, in April for two weeks and in July for ten days. He is currently in a relationship with a woman who lives abroad and the situation should be resolved within the next two years.

The father considers that he does not have enough contacts with his children. [ 8 ] Counsel for the children admits the majority of the facts alleged in the motions. Both children wish to stay with their aunt and uncle on a long term basis. Y would agree to return to live with his mother if her situation improved. As for X he does not wish to return to live with his mother. As for their father, the children say they want to see him, but not to sleep over at his home.

Me Ahmaranian considers that it is in the children’s best interest to be entrusted to the specific foster home of their maternal aunt and uncle until their respective age of majority. They have created a strong and secure attachment to their aunt and uncle and it would be prejudicial to them if they were to be moved them from this environment. [ 9 ] The Court also heard the testimony of the youth worker, Mr. A, and read the reports that the Director filed as proof of the children’s situation. The evidence reveals that the children have created a strong emotional bond with their aunt and uncle.

They are doing well in this home and feel secure in this structured environment. The aunt and uncle are very committed to the children and see to all their needs, including their medical needs. [ 10 ] The youth worker testifies that the mother has made progress since the last court order, but that she is not in a position to regain custody of her children on a full time basis. She has only recently completed her drug program and must now learn to stay abstinent. Furthermore, she is not stable financially and that does not have a job.

As for the father, he is not in a position to provide a structured environment for the children and to meet all their needs. His contacts with the children have not been consistent and the relationship needs to be rebuilt. [ 11 ] Under the circumstances, it is in the children’s best interest to be entrusted to the specific foster home of their aunt and uncle until their respective age of majority. The children have been living with their aunt and uncle for three and half years and in two years time they will have been living with them for five and half years, which is most of their life.

These children need to live in a stable and secure environment surrounded by adults who can answer to their needs on a daily basis. [ 12 ] The evidence and the admissions made have convinced the Court that the security and development of the children are still compromised. [ 13 ] THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 14 ] GRANTS the motions; [ 15 ] DECLARES still compromised the security and development of the children; [ 16 ] ORDERS that the children be entrusted to foster care until their respective age of majority; [ 17 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that the children are in the specific foster home of their maternal aunt, Ms.

B; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between the children and their parents be determined by the Director of Youth Protection, including supervision if deemed necessary; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the children and their parents be encouraged; [ 20 ] ORDERS the parents to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection, to meet with the youth workers as requested and to inform the youth workers of any change of address or telephone number in a delay of 24 hours; [ 21 ] ORDERS that the mother submit to random drug testing at the request of DYP; [ 22 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that the mother agrees to undergo random drug testing; [ 23 ] RECOMMENDS that the parents continue to address their personal problems; [ 24 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the children and their family until their respective age of majority; [ 25 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children, X and Y, to the Director of Youth Protection of A, who shall see that the measures are carried out; [ 26 ] ORDERS the execution of the present order by any peace officer.

Signed August 26, 2011 Ann-Marie Jones, J.C.Q. AMJ/dg Me Myriam DeBlois (Counsel for the D.Y.P.) Me Alain Ahmaranian (Counsel for the children) Me Judith Shapiro Knight (Counsel for the mother) Me Lucia Valvano (Counsel for the father) Date of hearing: August 23, 2011