2012 QCCQ 8895, 2012 QCCQ 8895

Protection de la jeunesse — 121107 2012 QCCQ 8895 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-41-001417-119 DATE: February 21, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , Youth Protection Worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A C.Y.P.C., working in Town A Applicant and X, born on […] Teenager and A Mother and B Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The applicant is presenting the Court with a motion to declare endangered the security and development of X, now 11 years of age, on the basis of unacceptable behaviours he would have adopted, mainly having sexually assaulted an 8-year-old girl. [ 2 ] At the hearing, only the mother is present; the father, for some unknown reason, does not attend although he has previously said he would. [ 3 ] As to the teenager, he is represented by counsel but not present at the hearing. [ 4 ] Basically, the case can be summarized as follows. [ 5 ] It all started in March 2011 when the Director of Youth Protection received a report alleging that the teenager had sexually abused an eight-year-old girl. [ 6 ] Subsequently, a second similar allegation led to the application of voluntary measures whereby X was entrusted to a reception centre for a period of thirty days. [ 7 ] Then, on November 8, 2011, the undersigned judge rendered a provisional order for the compulsory foster care of X in a rehabilitation centre until the hearing. [ 8 ] On the set date of the hearing, as mentioned above, only the mother is present whereas the father, who is the teenager’s main caregiver, fails to attend without giving any explanations. [ 9 ] It appears useful to specify that the parties have been separated for some time now and that X has mainly lived with his father in the community A while his mother resides in Town B. [ 10 ] With regard to the previously ordered provisional measures, as already explained, they have led to the placement of the teenager in a rehabilitation centre while awaiting the hearing. [ 11 ] He quickly adjusted his behaviour during his stay at the centre so that it becomes useless to have him stay longer in that environment. [ 12 ] It was then considered, given adequate supervision and assistance, to have the teenager back with his father as the latter had

seemingly wanted it to be that way, at least in principle. [ 13 ] His absence at the hearing raises questions in this regard. In the present circumstances, returning X to his father’s home cannot be contemplated without making sure first that Mr. B would agree to and collaborate in the measure. [ 14 ] The situation being such, all the parties present at the hearing agree that it is undoubtedly wiser to order a foster placement for the time being.

Then the father’s participation will be sought for the reintegration of his son into the family environment. [ 15 ] The Court considers unfortunate the father’s absence, but agrees that it would actually be unreasonable to force the return home of the teenager without making sure that a minimum of precautions are taken. [ 16 ] The foster placement will provide time to clarify the situation and to set the conditions up for the return home of the teenager. [ 17 ] FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 18 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 19 ] ORDERS the placement of X in a foster home for a period of three months starting on January 17, 2012 with reintegration with his father as soon as the situation allows; [ 20 ] ORDERS the teenager, the mother and the father to take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered by the Tribunal; [ 21 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling and assistance to the teenager and his family; [ 22 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection for the execution of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 23 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate in the execution of the judgment. __________________________________ JEAN-PIERRE GERVAIS, J.C.Q.

Me Robert-André Adam Cain Lamarre Casgrain Wells Lawyers for the applicant Me Cassandra Neptune Centre communautaire juridique A Lawyers for the child Me Sarah Plamondon Lawyer for the mother Me Michel Solomon Lawyer for the father Date of hearing: January 17, 2012