2022 QCCQ 14278, 2022 QCCQ 14278

Protection de la jeunesse — 229022 2022 QCCQ 14278 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-002351-192 DATE: August 8, 2022 (written judgment rendered on September 14, 2022) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on [...], 2019 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection worker, duly authorized person by the Director of Youth Protection of the Inuulitsivik C.Y.P.C.

Applicant and A Mother and B Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 95 of the Youth Protection Act ) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act forbids the publishing or broadcasting of information allowing for 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 (sections 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) asks the Court to review a decision rendered on October 26, 2020, regarding the child X, born on [...], 2019. At that date the Court declared the security and development still endangered and entrusted the child to Mr. C, until [...], 2037. [ 2 ] The DYP asks that the child be entrusted to Ms. D and Mr. C, until [...], 2037. Position of the Parties [ 3 ] The parents are absent, but represented by Me Angèle Tommasel.

They admits the facts that justify the revision and they agree with the measures. [ 4 ] The child is 3 years old. He is absent, but represented by Me Cassandra Neptune. After taking acknowledge of the evidence and of the parents’ admissions, Me Neptune submits that the situation of the child continue to be endangered and that the recommended measures are in his best interest. History of the Situation [ 5 ] On September 9, 2019 , the situation of the child was submitted to the Court. X is the fifth child of the parents.

One is entrusted to his maternal grandmother, one is adopted by the maternal grandmother and 2 are entrusted to a foster family down south, until their majority. X was born prematurely on [...], 2019, and stayed hospitalized until June 19, 2019. During this period, the mother had to be expelled from the hospital due to her level of intoxication. Following his discharge, X was entrusted to the foster family of Ms. D and Mr. C. Ms. D is a nurse at the hospital of Town a, and Mr. C stays at home. The child needed a very close medical follow-up. The parents did not exercise regular contacts with their child.

The Court declared that the security and development of the child were endangered [1] and entrusted him to a foster family for a period of one year. [ 6 ] On September 3, 2020 , the Court revised the situation. The child remained entrusted in the same foster family. The parents did not get involved in the child’s life despite being invited to do. In July 2020, the foster parents got separated and X remained with Mr. C. The foster father had to move down south because he had no job in Town A, but he was looking for one because he would like to be back in Town A. The Court entrusted the child to Mr.

C until he reaches his majority, and granted the attributes of parental authority to him. Facts and Analysis [ 7 ] Considering the absence of contestation, the parties file a draft agreement. [ 8 ] In this draft agreement, the parties admit the facts that justify maintaining the declaration of endangerment. The facts are the

following: 3.1. Since the last Court hearing, the situation of the parents remained the same; 3.2. The parents still display alcohol consumption and conjugal violence issues; 3.3. The parents are minimally involved in the life of the child; 3.4. The child has been under the care of Mr. C and Mrs. D since he was a few months old; 3.5. On October 26, 2020, the honourable Guy Lecompte rendered a judgment entrusting the child under the care of Mr. C until the age of majority; 3.6. At that time, the decision was taken to entrust the child to Mr. C since he was staying at home with the child while Mrs.

D was working; 3.7. Mr. C and Mrs. D then ended their conjugal life and started sharing custody of the child amicably; 3.8. Mrs. D has been the primary caregiver for the child and Mr. C sees the child every second weekend; 3.9. Despite the relationship between Mrs. D and Mr. C being overall harmonious, some conflicts occurred which led to the child’s needs not being answered in a timely manner; 3.10. On more than one occasion, Mr. C refused to sign the authorizations for the child (daycare, medical appointment, etc.) without any reasonable cause; 3.11.

The child was born prematurely and has a fragile health state which requires frequent medical follow-ups; 3.12. The child needs to be entrusted to both his caregivers so Mrs. D can provide the necessary care for the child; 3.13. Mrs. D is willing to take care of the child until the age of majority. [ 9 ] The parties agree with the following measures 5.1. That the child be entrusted to the foster family of Mrs. D and of Mr. C; 5.2. That the child and the child’s parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the tribunal; 5.3. That the parents seek help through the Social Services concerning their alcohol, drugs and personal issues; 5.4. That the contacts between the child and the parents be determined by the Director as for the modalities, the frequency and the degree of supervision; 5.5. That the exercise of certain attributes of parental authority be withdrawn from the parents and granted to Ms. D and Mr. C regarding health, school, extracurricular activities, travelling and passport; 5.6.

That a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and the child’s family; 5.7. That the situation of the child be entrusted to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; The whole until: April 20, 2037 . [ 10 ] After verifying that the content of the draft agreement had been clearly explained to the parents and that the consent had been given freely, the Court declares to agree with the measures and accepts to ratify it.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 11 ] GRANTS the application; [ 12 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child X, born on [...], 2019, are still endangered; [ 13 ] RATIFIES the draft agreement; [ 14 ] ORDERS the implementation of the following measures and ORDERS the parties to comply with those: • That the child be entrusted to the foster family of Mrs. D and of Mr. C; • That the child and the child’s parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the tribunal; • That the parents seek help through the Social Services concerning their alcohol, drugs and personal issues; • That the contacts between the child and the parents be determined by the Director as for the modalities, the frequency and the degree of supervision; • That the exercise of certain attributes of parental authority be withdrawn from the parents and granted to Ms. D and Mr. C

regarding health, school, extracurricular activities, travelling and passport; • That a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and the child’s family; • That the situation of the child be entrusted to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; The whole until: April 20, 2037 . [ 15 ] ORDERS the clerk of the Court of Quebec, Youth Division, to attach to this judgment a copy of the draft agreement to form an integrant part hereof, and to attach such copy of the judgment to be subsequently delivered. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Adèle Cyr, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Me Angèle Tommasel, attorney for the parents Date of hearing: August 8, 2022