2011 QCCQ 11909, 2011 QCCQ 11909

Protection de la jeunesse — 114252 2011 QCCQ 11909 CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC District of [...] JJ0296 COURT OF QUEBEC YOUTH DIVISION N°: 525-41-022561-096 N° : 525-41-022560-098 N° : 525-41-022559-090 DATE: September 6, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE HONOURABLE ANN-MARIE JONES, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ Director of Youth Protection A Youth and Family Centres Applicant - and - X Born on […], 1996 - and Y Born on […], 2001 - and - Z Born on […], 2006 - and - A - and - B - and - C, Mother of Y Respondents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGEMENT

Section 95 Y.P.A. ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: Within the framework of the Youth Protection Act, no person may publish or broadcast information allowing 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. [Y.P.A. sections 11.2.1 and 135] [ 1 ] The Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of September 6, 2011, in accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the law. [ 2 ] The Court was presented with three motions for extension of orders rendered September 7, 2010, ordering that the children be entrusted to the care of Mr. B with a social follow-up for a period of one year. [ 3 ] The principal facts alleged in support of the Director’s motions are the following: • The mother’s situation remains unstable, more particularly but not restrictively in that: . the mother did not secure and apartment of her own and continues living with a friend;

. the mother was inconsistent at times in following through with the A Program; . although requested by the youth protection worker to attend random alcohol testing on an almost weekly basis, the mother did not present herself when asked to do so; . information is to the effect that the mother continues consuming alcohol excessively; . the mother regularly gets involved in various quarrels which often leads to police interventions; . the mother presented herself unannounced to the home of Mr.

B which contributed to conflicts with the latter; . in May 2011, the mother had a weekend visit with Z in a motel and got involved in a dispute with a family friend, which led to the intervention of the police; . following this incident, the mother’s visits with Z were temporarily suspended and later became supervised; • X has had difficulties in school, failed some of her classes and is presently registered in summer school; • X has refused to have visits with her mother; • X has been exposed to some conflicts between the mother and Mr. B; • The relationship between the mother and Mr.

B remains conflictual and highly volatile; • Y is doing very well in school, both academically and behaviourally; • Y remains on a waiting list for services with the ADHD clinic through the A Hospital; • Y has refused to have visits with Ms. A; • The whereabouts of Y's mother are unknown; • Z has had weekend visits with her mother; • Z will be attending kindergarten in September 2011 and is presently doing well in her summer camp program. [ 4 ] The Director of Youth Protection recommends that the children be maintained in the care of Mr. B with a social follow-up for a period of two years. [ 5 ] Mr.

B admits the majority of the facts alleged in the motions and agrees with the recommended measures. Mr. B states he is caring for the children to the best of his abilities. He admits that the children have seen Ms. A on two occasions without DYP's knowledge. However, Mr. B says that Ms. A has been harassing him over the phone and that all visits will now go through the youth worker. [ 6 ] Ms. A admits the majority of the facts alleged in the motions and agrees for X and Y to be entrusted to the care of Mr. B for a period of two years. Ms.

A admits that X and Y refuse to have visits with her, although they recently were present at two family picnics in a park. In the case of Z, Ms. A wants her to be entrusted to her care in six months time. Ms. A says that her daughter wants to live with her. Ms. A explains that she is currently living in a friend’s apartment and that does know if she will remain living there. [ 7 ] Counsel for the children informs the Court that X and Y do not want have contacts with Ms. A. They wish to remain in the care of Mr. B.

As for Z, Me Grondin considers that the mother has not stabilized her situation and therefore cannot care for Z on a full time basis. [ 8 ] The Court also heard the testimony of [social worker 1], youth worker, and read the Court reports the Director filed as proof of the children’s situation. The evidence reveals that the children are doing well in Mr. B’s care. As for Ms. A, she has participated in programs A, but has difficulty maintaining abstinence. Unfortunately, Ms. A and Mr.

B’s relationship remains conflictual. [ 9 ] Under the circumstances, it is in the children’s best interest to be entrusted to the care of Mr. B. Ms. A residential instability and personal difficulties prevent her from regaining custody of Z at this time. [ 10 ] The evidence and the admissions made have convinced the Court that the security and development of the children are still compromised. [ 11 ] THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 12 ] GRANTS the motions; [ 13 ] DECLARES still compromised the security and development of the children, X, Y and Z; [ 14 ] ORDERS that X and Y be entrusted to the care of Mr.

B for a period of two years; [ 15 ] ORDERS that Z be entrusted to the care of her father; [ 16 ] RECOMMENDS that Mr. B seek legal custody of all three children in Superior Court; [ 17 ] RECOMMENDS that Mr. B take the appropriate steps to be registered as X’s father on her birth certificate;

[ 18 ] ORDERS that the frequency and modality of contacts between all three children and Ms. A be determined by the Director of Youth Protection, including supervision as deemed necessary, taking into account the wishes of the children; [ 19 ] ORDERS and interdiction of contacts between Y and his mother, Ms. C; [ 20 ] ORDERS that the Director of Youth Protection be authorized to sign all consents regarding Y and X, if Ms. A is unavailable to do so; [ 21 ] ORDERS that Ms. A and Mr. B ensure that there is no form of verbal or physical violence between them in the presence of the children; [ 22 ] ORDERS Ms.

A and Mr. B to collaborate with DYP and to meet with the youth workers as requested; [ 23 ] ORDERS Ms. A to submit to random substance testing; [ 24 ] TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that Ms.

A agrees to submit to random substance testing; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the children receive all health care services required by their situation and more particularly: • RECOMMENDS that X participate in an individual therapy; • ORDERS that Y be seen at the Douglas for his ADHD and TAKES JUDICIAL NOTICE that DYP will take the necessary steps for the child to be seen at the Douglas; [ 26 ] ORDERS that DYP be authorized to receive pertinent information from all treating professionals and services involved with the family in order to ascertain their therapeutic progress; [ 27 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother provide proof of employment to DYP; [ 28 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to the children and their family for a period of two years; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the children, X, Y and Z, to the Director of Youth Protection of A Youth and Family Centres, who shall see that the measures are carried out; [ 30 ] ORDERS the execution of the present order by any peace officer.

Signed September 9, 2011 Ann-Marie Jones, J.C.Q. AMJ/dg Me Myriam DeBlois (Counsel for the D.Y.P.) Me Guy-Luc Grondin (Counsel for the children) Me Judith Shapiro Knight (Counsel for A Me Maïa Sureau (Counsel for Mr.

B) Date of hearing: September 6, 2011