2014 QCCQ 14883, 2014 QCCQ 14883

Protection de la jeunesse — 143126 2014 QCCQ 14883 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001738-142 DATE: July 17, 2014 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on […], 2011 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, working Town A, district A (Quebec) […] Applicant A , residing and domiciled in Town A, district A (Quebec) […] Mother ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] The applicant asks the Court to declare the security or development of X, born on December 31, 2011 endangered pursuant to

section 38 b) 1° (iii) of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The mother is present and represented by her lawyer. The child is represented by her lawyer. [ 3 ] The mother admits that the security or development of the child is compromised according to the law. [ 4 ] If the Court concludes that the security or development of the child is endangered pursuant to the law all the parties agree to recommend that the child be entrusted to a foster home for a period of six months.

The child could be reintegrated in the maternal environment as soon as the mother is admitted into a facility where a treatment is available to develop her parental skills. [ 5 ] The Court considers the following facts as proven by preponderant evidence. [ 6 ] On April 4, 2013 the Director of Youth Protection received a signalement concerning a situation where the child was left under the care of a 16 years old girl. The mother was not in Town A.

When the worker visited the house the babysitter was sleeping and the house was dirty. [ 7 ] On April 8, 2013 the mother signed a provisional agreement and the child was placed in foster care. At the end of the agreement the child returned with her mother. [ 8 ] On July 5, 2013 the child was placed in a foster home in Town B because she was neglected and abandoned by her mother. At the end of the month the mother came back in Town A to live with her grandmother. [ 9 ] On [...], 2014 the mother gave birth to a second child. In the same month, the mother left for Town B.

She left the child under the care of her mother B. [ 10 ] On April 2, 2014 the mother left Town B to Town C for a medical appointment whit her newborn. On the same date the Director of Youth Protection received a signalement concerning the child who was left under the care of a 17 years old aunt. The grandmother B was intoxicated in the community and her whereabouts were unknown. The aunt informed the Director of Youth Protection that she was leaving the community. The child was placed in an immediate foster care placement. [ 11 ] On April 8, the Court entrusted the child to her mother.

The present hearing was scheduled on June 3. [ 12 ] On April 22, the grandmother contacted the Director of Youth Protection's office and asked for a purchase order for groceries for her family and the child's family. It was refused. [ 13 ] On May 23, the mother was supposed to meet the Youth Protection worker at his office. She didn't show up. The mother went out drinking the night before and was still sleeping. The children were babysat by the mother's 13 years old sibling. The child

[ 14 ] The child is two years old. [ 15 ] The impact of the negligence is emotional. The child often changes her caregiver when she is with the mother or the grandmother. She waits to be fed and doesn't have any routine. Decision [ 16 ] Considering the evidence as a whole the Court concludes that the security or development of the child is endangered pursuant to

section 38 b) 1° (iii) of the Youth Protection Act . [ 17 ] The measures recommended by the Director of Youth Protection and agreed upon by the parties are reasonable, appropriate and in the child best interest. For these reasons the Court: [ 18 ] Grants the motion; [ 19 ] Declares that the security or development of X, born on […], 2011 is endangered pursuant to

section 38 b) 1° (iii) of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 20 ] Orders that the child be entrusted in a foster home for a period of six months with reintegration in the maternal environment as soon as the mother is admitted to a treatment to develop her parental skills; [ 21 ] Takes judicial notice of the mother's consent to go to such treatment; [ 22 ] Orders that the contacts between the children and the mother be supervised by the Director of Youth Protection as for the modalities, the frequency and the length; [ 23 ] Orders the mother to remain sober in the presence of the child; [ 24 ] Orders the mother to collaborate with the Director of Youth Protection and all the others professional involved in the situation of the child; [ 25 ] Orders that a person working for an institution or body provides aid, counselling and assistance to the child and the mother for a period of 12 months; [ 26 ] Orders any police body to collaborate for the purpose of executing this enactment; [ 27 ] Entrusts the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection A who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ Josée Bélanger, J.C.Q.

Me Gabriel Gaudreault, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Yan Massé, attorney for the children Me Clara Lafrance Egervari, attorney for the mother Date of hearing: June 3, 2014