2019 QCCQ 15279, 2019 QCCQ 15279

Protection de la jeunesse — 1910408 2019 QCCQ 15279 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-002243-183 DATE: January 17, 2019 (written judgment rendered on September 24, 2019) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2006 [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working in [...] Applicant and A, residing and domiciled in [...] Mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 38 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 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) asks the Court to declare the security and development of the youth X, born on [...], 2006, endangered under

section 38 (f) [1] of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The mother is absent, but represented by Me Tommasel.

The mother’s lawyer informs the Court that she is in training in [Village A], but she has her position and is ready to proceed in her absence. [ 3 ] The Court authorizes to proceed in her absence, considering that the mother was served, she’s duly represented and everybody agrees to proceed in her absence. [ 4 ] The mother admits some allegations and she would like shorter measures, meaning at the end of the school year or if not, before the next school year begins. [ 5 ] X, who is 12 years old, is present and represented by Me Martineau.

He admits some allegations and he agrees to remain to the rehabilitation centre, but suggests that the duration of five months would be sufficient. The youth’s lawyer asks the Court to strongly encourage that the child be entrusted to the rehabilitation centre of [Village B] and the increase of outdoor activities for him at the rehabilitation centre. Facts [ 6 ] X always lived with his mother. His father is undeclared, but he has frequent contact with him. The mother works full time for the village B. [ 7 ] On October 16, X arrived at school with a loaded gun.

The mother collaborates with the police force and the DYP worker. X was met and explained he did that because he is bullied. According to him, some youths at school keep mistreating him and physically abuse him. He added that a youth told him to kill himself. The DYP worker confronted him saying that he threatened to kill a teacher. X repeated that it was not his intention to harm anyone, but himself. He cried a lot during the meeting, always saying that he did not want to stay in this village because of the bullying.

The DYP worker confirms that on September 15, 2018, a youth from the village B was entrusted to the rehabilitation as he was bullying X. [ 8 ] The mother confirmed that her son is a victim of bullying, but she recognized that it was totally unacceptable. She collaborates fully with the authorities. [ 9 ] According to the teacher, X has good learning capacities and all the potential to succeed. Unfortunately, he is not going to school because of the bullying. [ 10 ] X was entrusted to the rehabilitation centre in [Village B] on October 16, 2018.

The day after he took advantage of a few seconds without supervision to run away and to go to his mother’s place. On October 18, after having seen that the door can’t be locked adequately, X ran away again. As consequences, he was sent to [unit A] in City A.

[ 11 ] On October 30, during the criminal appearance, the provincial Director submitted that X should be released from [Unit A] as it’s a unit for criminal offenders aged from 16 to 18 years old, and this resource does not respond to X’s specific needs (suicidal crisis, low self-esteem and inadequate coping strategies). Justice Bigué released him with the conditions to reside at the Group Home. [ 12 ] The evaluation report informs that the DYP was involved in the situation of X from 2010 to 2013 for physical abuse. At this time he had been threatened by his father with a weapon.

As the mother was very protective, the conclusion of the evaluation was facts founded, but the situation not endangered. [ 13 ] Since 2014, X is referred to Social Services because of his low attendance at school. He was 8 years old when those references stated. [ 14 ] On November 30, 2017, while being intoxicated and suicidal, X was medevaced to Puvirnituq. [ 15 ] On January 29, 2018, the DYP also intervened during X’s suicidal crisis while he pointed a knife on another youth.

He received health services at that time. [ 16 ] Following this actual evaluation, the DYP is expecting from X that he learns to express his emotion, mostly his anger and also that he learns to respect the rules and the authority. He needs to go to school, and also he has to address his consumption. An intervention plan was prepared at the rehabilitation centre with those objectives. [ 17 ] The DYP would like to start a reintegration with the mother as soon as possible. To achieve that, the mother has to demonstrate her capacity to impose rules, authority and consequences.

He has to learn some tools to deal with X’s crisis. [ 18 ] The school remains a delicate topic for X. He fears the school and to be bullied again. When he is stressed, he strongly reacts. Actually, as he has the condition not to go to school, he is going to school at the rehabilitation centre. [ 19 ] The mother is very close to her son. She had been separated from him when he was younger because of the conjugal violence in her house. She is feeling guilty to have put her son in this situation.

Because of that, she has difficulty to impose consequences consistently, but she is really open to work on this issue. [ 20 ] The DYP worker agrees to prepare a visit calendar including sleepover, as it will be the only way to work with the mother and to see if X applies the strategies he learned at the rehabilitation centre. [ 21 ] X is a very active boy and love outdoor activities. The rehabilitation centre offers him to go outside twice a week, which is not enough for him. He would like to play hockey, but he has no right to go to the arena.

The DYP worker engage herself to check if he can play hockey somewhere else, in another structure. Analysis [ 22 ] It’s obvious that X has to work on his capacity to express his emotion. What he did at school is totally unacceptable. The bullying he suffers is not an excuse, but could explain the situation. [ 23 ] It was known that he was not going to school. If more investigation had been made, it would have been possible to intervene before the situation degenerated so much. [ 24 ] Today, it’s obvious that X’s situation is endangered under

section 38 (

f) YPA and he deserves rehabilitation services. The mother also has to work and she is open to receive the service, it will be easier to address the situation. [ 25 ] Regarding the duration of the measures, the Court considers that it’s important for X to finish his school year at the rehabilitation. Moreover, as he was a victim of bullying and because of what he did, it will be very stressful to start the next school year with other youths. The presence of the rehabilitation staff could procure a safety net in this situation.

Doing so, the Court will order the placement until the end of October 2019, knowing that a progressive reintegration could start two months before. FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 26 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 27 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the youth X, born on [...], 2006, are endangered under

section 38 (

f) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the youth be entrusted to an institution operating a rehabilitation centre, chosen by the institution operating a child and youth protection centre with a possible reintegration with the mother if the situation allows it; [ 29 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the youth be entrusted to the rehabilitation centre in [Village B]; [ 30 ] ORDERS that the youth and the mother take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 31 ] ORDERS that the youth receives specific health care and services required by his situation; [ 32 ] ORDERS that a psychological evaluation of X be performed and that all the recommendations be followed, including any other evaluation recommended by the psychologist; [ 33 ] ORDERS that the youth attend a school or another place of learning on a daily basis; [ 34 ] ENCOURAGES and INSISTS on the importance, for X, of practising outside activities;

[ 35 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the youth and the mother be facilitated and the modalities, the frequency and the degree of supervision are determined by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 36 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body, provide aid, counselling or assistance to the youth and the mother; [ 37 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the youth X , to the Director of Youth Protection A, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 38 ] ORDERS the execution of the present judgment by any peace officer; [ 39 ] THE WHOLE until the end of October 2019. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Sarah Bourgeois-Lessard, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Isabelle Martineau, attorney for the youth Me Angèle Tommasel, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: January 17, 2019