2020 QCCQ 6333, 2020 QCCQ 6333

Protection de la jeunesse — 205829 2020 QCCQ 6333 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] « Youth Chamber »

N° : 760-41-006111-192 760-41-006112-190 760-41-006113-198 DATE : September 16, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X , born [...], 2013 Y , born [...], 2017 Z , born [...], 2018 Children ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTRICE DE LA PROTECTION DE LA JEUNESSE A Applicant -et- A B Parents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] Context [ 2 ] On January 16, 2020, the Court orders the application of various measures of protection in regards to the siblings X, Y and Z, taking act of a written agreement having intervened between the parties. [ 3 ] Within this agreement, the parties recognize that the parent’s conflictual dynamic has led to educational neglect as well as the psychological ill-treatment of their children.

Providing for a follow-up until August 30, 2020 as well as other measures of rehabilitation, the children are entrusted to a foster home while benefitting from supervised contacts with their parents. [ 4 ] The Director now seeks the revision and extension of this order, alleging that more time is required to rehabilitate the family environment and work towards the objective of reintegrating the children with their mother.

Is also sought the renewed supervision of the children’s access with their father. [ 5 ] Both parents are duly notified of the proceedings and are present on the date of the hearing. [ 6 ] Once the caseworker advises the father of the modified recommendations regarding his access, he states his disagreement and leaves the courthouse. After hearing the parties and considering the children’s best interests, the Court proceeds in his absence. [ 7 ] The mother subscribes her position and agrees to the orientation sought by the Director. [ 8 ] Analysis and decision

[ 9 ] Since the last order, the children remain in foster care while benefitting from weekly visitation with each of their parents. They are evolving generally well. [ 10 ] Initially, the contacts are supervised. The children visit their mother for one day a week in the women’s shelter where she resides. The father, residing with his sister, sees the children for three hours a week. [ 11 ] Both parents are attentive to their children’s needs and demonstrate good parental capacities.

As of March 2020, the parties agree to progress the contacts with the partial lifting of supervision. [ 12 ] The pandemic results in the suspension of visitation from March to May 2020, during which time the children have access to their parents regularly through phone and video calls. During this time, the parents are able to maintain their focus on their objectives while remaining available for their children. [ 13 ] In April, the mother moves out of the shelter to reside with a friend. She maintains a healthy lifestyle and implicates herself in various services.

She continues to strive towards her autonomy on all levels, awaiting the possibility of her returning to live with her children in Ontario, near her family. [ 14 ] Once visits resume, the parents are advised of the requirement to respect various sanitary rules. Repeatedly, the father fails to do so despite reminders and clarifications. In reason of such, supervision by the Director is resumed as of June.

The father strongly voices his disagreement, even blaming social services in front of his daughter if he ceases to see her. [ 15 ] On June 18, the Court renders a provisional measure providing supervision of the children’s contacts with their father in order to ensure the respect of sanitary measures. [ 16 ] Following this order, the situation resolves itself and the parties once again agree to lifting supervision of the father’s visitation.

As well, the access periods are extended in each parental environment, including sleepovers at their mother’s home. [ 17 ] The parents continue to work towards stabilizing their respective personal situations and are seen to be progressing positively towards their goals. They each participate actively in services relating to their challenging issues. [ 18 ] The parental communication remains problematic. Their conjugal difficulties have been ongoing for many years, resulting in a toxic relationship which still can submerge their parental capacities.

It is only recently that they agree to meetings with the caseworker with the objective of finding better means to co-parent. [ 19 ] A recent incident demonstrates that the father still has to come to terms with the present situation and resolve anger issues which can impact the children. [ 20 ] The father shows up unannounced during an activity scheduled by the mother with the children. He insists on speaking with the mother and becomes loud and disrespectful, to the point where he is asked by staff to leave the premises. Outside, he accosts the mother again and continues his tirade.

The children, unwilling witnesses to this scene, are in distress. [ 21 ] After this incident, the caseworker meets with X. She is very reactive and starts to hit her head, cry and yell. She refuses to elaborate on the incident, save to say that she was scared. [ 22 ] The mother also testifies to the fact that the father has been increasingly insistent, sending numerous messages to her and refusing to respect her boundaries. [ 23 ] With reason, the Director seeks a renewal of the supervision of the father’s access.

The father’s inability to curb his emotional outbursts in front of his children is concerning and permits the Court to question his understanding of the devastating consequences on his children’s development.

As well, it seems clear that the parent’s relationship continues to reverberate on the situation, requiring continued services. [ 24 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : [ 25 ] GRANTS the application for revision and extension of a Court order; [ 26 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the children are still in danger; [ 27 ] REVISES AND EXTENDS the Court order rendered on January 16, 2020; [ 28 ] ENTRUSTS the children to a foster family chosen by the Director of Youth Protection until March 1, 2021; [ 29 ] AUTHORIZES the progressive and/or complete return of the children with their mother as of December 1, 2020; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the children and the mother be determined upon agreement between the parties; [ 31 ] ENTRUSTS the children to their mother as of March 1, 2021; [ 32 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the children and the father be determined upon agreement between the parties and the presence of a third party chosen by Director; [ 33 ] AUTHORIZES the partial or complete lifting of said supervision upon agreement between the parties; [ 34 ] FORBIDS the parents to be together in the presence of the children, except if required and authorized by the Director;

[ 35 ] ORDERS that the parents report to the Director on the measures they apply in their regard or the children’s regard to put an end to the situation of endangerment; [ 36 ] ORDERS that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 37 ] TAKES ACT that the Director intends to make unannounced visits at the parent’s during the children visitation; [ 38 ] ORDERS that the Court order be executed by any peace officer; [ 39 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or a body provide aid, counselling and assistance to the children and their family; [ 40 ] THE WHOLE for one year, save the placement order; [ 41 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the judgment to intervene herein. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q.

Chambre de la jeunesse Me Anne-Catherine Bujold Attorney for the Director Me Annie Girard Attorney for the mother Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the children Hearing date : September 16, 2020 Date of signature : October 13, 2020