2012 QCCQ 13684, 2012 QCCQ 13684

Protection de la jeunesse — 125840 2012 QCCQ 13684 COURT OF QUEBEC Canada PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF […] Youth Court Division No: 760-41-004203-124 760-41-004204-122 DATE: June 8, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE BEATRICE CLEMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X , born on [...], 2011 Y , born on [...], 2011 Children DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION OF LE CENTRE JEUNESSE A Petitioner -and- A -and- B JC0B11 Parents of the children ______________________________________________________________________

JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ CAUTION : The Youth Protection Act provides that within the framework of this Act, no person may publish or broadcast information allowing a child or the child's parents to be identified. Whomsoever contravenes this

article is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine [articles 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.]. [ 1 ] The Court is seized of motions for protection concerning the children X and Y, both born on [...], 2011. [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection alleges that the security or the development of the children are in danger in reason of a serious risk of negligence, as more amply detailed in paragraph 4 of the respective motions.

As well as other measures of aid and assistance for one year, the Petitioner recommends that the children be entrusted to their father, with supervised access for the mother. [ 3 ] The Petitioner produces the reports on the analysis of the children's social situation as evidence in lieu of testimony and this, by consent. [ 4 ] The admissions of the parties as to the motions are noted in the Court record and they indicate their assent to the measures proposed by the Director.

The mother affirms that her agreement as to the entrustment of the children to their father is conditional to his residing with his parents. [ 5 ] At the time of the initial involvement of the Director of Youth Protection, the children are residing in the care of their parents. [ 6 ] The parent's relationship is inconsistent and punctuated by conflict and separations.

From May 2011 to February 2012, the couple resided with the paternal grandparents, after which they move on their own into an apartment with their newborn daughters. [ 7 ] The parents demonstrate difficulties in adapting to the needs of their two young children. The mother, at 19 years old, is particularly overwhelmed.

The parents relationship becomes increasingly strained and there is little cooperation as to the children. [ 8 ] The father has a history of drug consumption, although he affirms having significantly reduced his habit since the mother's pregnancy. [ 9 ] The mother has a difficult background imprinted with violence, which, along with her degree of immaturity, have an important impact on her parental capacities.

Furthermore, in 2010, the mother is diagnosed with Cluster B personality traits and post traumatic stress disorder, for which the symptoms include impulsivity, mood swings, difficulty in relating to others, etc. She refuses to receive treatment or medication for her mental health issues and this, notwithstanding referrals to this effect. [ 10 ] On March 2, 2012, the mother discovers a cache of 386 pills of speed in a first aid kit, which she has been instructed to remit to one of the father's friends.

The father is arrested and detained on charges of drug trafficking, death threats and assault. [ 11 ] The mother presents herself at the police station with the children and all their belongings and states that she is unable to care for them and wants them adopted. The children are entrusted to foster care on a provisional basis.

Following a positive evaluation of the paternal grandparents, the children are entrusted to them on March 15 th . [ 12 ] The parents are each afforded individual regular access to their daughters on a supervised basis. [ 13 ] Since the placement, the mother has minimal contacts with her children. During the visits, she is able to see as to her children's basic needs, but is inconsistent as to their routine and unable to soothe them. [ 14 ] The father is present for all the scheduled visits and visits daily with the children at his parent' residence.

He demonstrates an ability to recognize and respond adequately to his daughter's needs. [ 15 ] The parents relationship continues to be inconsistent. They rekindle their relationship and become engaged to be married, although each keeps their own apartment. This changes when the father requests that the children be returned to his care and agrees to continued supervision of the mother's visitation. [ 16 ] The Court is convinced that the children can be entrusted to their father's care, conditional to the security net provided by his continued residency with his parents.

Notwithstanding, the Court remains concerned by his avowed drug consumption and recent related criminal activities, which are clearly inconsistent with the care of two young babies. The Court takes judicial act that the father is prepared to submit to random drug testing to confirm his commitment to remain drug-free. [ 17 ] As for the mother, it is essential that she focus on dealing with her personal difficulties, which are negatively affecting her ability to be available for her daughters and bond with them.

To this end, the Court takes act that the mother is now ready to receive a medical follow-up to deal specifically with her mental health issues. [ 18 ] The supervision of the mother's contacts remains in the children's best interests until such time as she is able to stabilize her situation and prioritize their needs. [ 19 ] The Court determines that the security and the development of the children are compromised in reason of a serious risk of negligence. As well as receiving the consent of the parties, the recommendations forwarded by the Director of Youth Protection are appropriate and in their best interests.

[ 20 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 21 ] GRANTS the motions; [ 22 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the children are in danger; [ 23 ] E NTRUSTS the children to their father, conditional to his living with his parents, Ms. C and Mr. D; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the parents undertake an active

part in the application of the measures designed to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the children is in danger; [ 25 ] AUTHORIZES the contacts between the children and their mother upon agreement between the parties and in the presence of a third party designated by the Youth Protection Director; [ 26 ] TAKES ACT that the Director of Youth Protection agrees that the supervision may be assured by the mother's foster parents, namely Ms. E or Mr.

F; [ 27 ] PERMITS the withdrawal of supervision as to the mother's access, upon mutual agreement of the parties and in respect to the evolution of her situation; [ 28 ] TAKES ACT that the mother will undertake steps to receive a medical follow up; [ 29 ] TAKES ACT of the father's agreement to submit himself to random drug testing at the request of the Director of Youth Protection, if such is deemed necessary; [ 30 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling and assistance to the children and their parents for a period of one year; [ 31 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children to the Director of Youth Protection of the Centre Jeunesse A for the execution of the measures; __________________________________ BEATRICE CLEMENT, J.C.Q.

Me Caterine Caron Attorney for the Petitioner Me Michel Robert Attorney for the mother Me Cynthia Beaumier Attorney for the father Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the children Date of hearing: June 8, 2012