2022 QCCQ 5529, 2022 QCCQ 5529

Protection de la jeunesse — 222846 2022 QCCQ 5529 JB5047 QUEBEC COURT CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT […] TOWN […] « Youth division »

N o : 455-41-001023-167 DATE: March 4, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PASCALE BERARDINO, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE SITUATION OF : X Born on […], 2010 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of CIUSSS A; Applicant -and- a Child’s mother -and- b Child’s father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT [1] ______________________________________________________________________ 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 9.2, 9.3 and 135 Y.P.A.). Introduction [ 1 ] The Director is requesting the revision of the Court order rendered on July 29 th , 2021. [ 2 ] By this order, the Tribunal declared the security and development of X are still in danger on the ground of educational neglect. [ 3 ] As protective measures, the Court entrusted the child to the kinship foster family of Ms. C and Mr.

D, authorized contacts with her father, upon agreement between the parties, took judicial notice that the contacts with the father would take the form of a joint custody with the foster family, forbade all direct and indirect contacts with the mother, ordered various others measures including a social follow-up for a period of six months. [ 4 ] Today, the Director considers that the security and the development of the child X are still in danger for the same motive. [ 5 ] Because of the new facts alleged, the Director recommends revising the protective measures so that the Court maintain the current placement of the child, authorize contacts with the father, upon agreement and according to the modalities set with the Director, prohibit all contacts between the child and the mother, authorize the resumption of these contacts if the mother participates on a regular basis to the social follow-up and order various other measures including a social follow-up until the child’s age of majority, that is […], 2028. [ 6 ] At the hearing of March 4, 2022, the mother is absent and not represented. [ 7 ] The father is present and represented.

He would like eventually to return to a joint custody with the foster parents but

recognizes that X is well taken care of right now. [ 8 ] He is also asking to have more contacts with his daughter at a frequency of every other weekend. [ 9 ] The child’s lawyer states having spoken to her client. X said she doesn’t mind being entrusted to her foster parents but mentioned twice that it would be preferable until she was 18. She also wants more contacts with her father. Question in litigation [ 10 ] Is the child’s situation also compromised for a new motive of serious risk of neglect due to the father’s situation? [ 11 ] What should be the frequency of contacts between the child and her father?

Evolution of the situation [ 12 ] X is very close to her foster family of proximity, has a good chemistry with them and likes having a place there. [ 13 ] She feels like she is a part of the family and the person X goes to the most when she lives difficulties or struggles is Ms.

C. [ 14 ] X continued to live in some modality of shared custody between her foster family and her father, despite the father being upset since he wanted full custody instead. [ 15 ] Indeed, since the last court date the father has been reluctant to speak with the delegate due to his disagreement regarding the last decision. [ 16 ] In October 2021, he finally accepted to meet with the delegate at his home with X who claimed she liked being at her father’s home. [ 17 ] X talks with enthusiasm about the activities she does at her father’s place.

But she also said that she did not want to go to her father’s place when his girlfriend is not present. [ 18 ] In the fall, X was doing very well academically in school and she was about to be transferred back to regular classes instead of the adapted ones she was attending so far. [ 19 ] Nonetheless, X’s teacher has observed that she is more impolite, screams and can have opposing behaviours during the week when she is with her father. [ 20 ] It was also reported that she is often not dressed properly regarding the temperature and has no snack in her lunch. [ 21 ] On a few occasions, X arrived late at school which impacted her behaviour. [ 22 ] On November 22nd, 2021, X received a red card because she was physically and verbally violent towards another student. [ 23 ] Ms.

C said that, according to X, during the periods at her father’s place there is no structure, she does not do her homework and her father does not watch her. [ 24 ] During the father’s custody, X has also been seen walking in the streets alone after school, in the evening. [ 25 ] All the while, the father’s personal situation became unstable. He entertains an on and off relationship with Ms. E, which was punctuated with fights, outbursts and conjugal violence. [ 26 ] From what the fathers admits, the police intervened twice during the summer of 2021 due to altercations with his girlfriend.

X’s brother, Y, was present both times and her half-sister Z once but never X. [ 27 ] At the end of summer, the father’s girlfriend and her mother entered illegally in the father’s residence to get her stuff, and a fight occurred between them during which the father was injured. The police intervened again for a third time. [ 28 ] Even though the child has not witnessed this event, she noticed after that the father had a black eye. [ 29 ] Following this, Ms.

E obtained a restraining order against the father. [ 30 ] At the same period, he also got into an altercation with Z’s mother about their child’s custody. [ 31 ] Z had been receiving services under youth protection but her filed was closed at the time, considering the improvement in her family situation. [ 32 ] Because of these events, her situation was signaled anew. [ 33 ] X is aware of this conflict as she sometimes video calls with F who is Z’s mother’s (Ms.

F) other child. At one time, the father took X’s phone and yelled insults to Ms. F. [ 34 ] Concerning his drug use, it is reported that the father is consuming cannabis frequently at home in the presence of his children. [ 35 ] He claims his drug use is not problematic but his behaviour has notably deteriorated. [ 36 ] He seems to be losing more and more control over his emotions which was something he had greatly improved during the year

before. [ 37 ] On December 1 st , 2021, the revision table was held and the father mentioned he would get X at school and leave with her if the contacts were to be reduced. [ 38 ] He also left the meeting before the end, slamming the door. [ 39 ] Considering the deterioration of the father’s condition, the Director decided to seize the court in order to modify the frequency and modality of contacts between the child and her father. [ 40 ] On December 7 th , 2021, the Tribunal rendered a provisional order according to which these contacts were to be determined by the Director. [ 41 ] Afterwards, X was allowed to spend every other weekend at her father’s place.

The contacts were going well. She reported having a good time with her father and Y. [ 42 ] Then on February 16 th , the Director was informed of yet another quarrel between the father and her spouse during which Y was present and the object of his father’s anger. [ 43 ] Indeed, during this altercation, Ms. E had to hold the father and tell Y to leave before he got hit by him. Y left by jumping off the balcony as his father was blocking the entrance. [ 44 ] The police was called yet again.

A new signalement was made for Y who was temporarily entrusted to the same people forming X’s foster home. [ 45 ] At that moment, the Director was informed that the father started using drugs again. [ 46 ] The contacts between X and her father were suspended and the later was not opened to discuss with the delegate about the situation. [ 47 ] As for the mother, the situation remains the same as before. She has not had any contacts with the Director since the summer of 2018.

Her whereabouts were unknown. [ 48 ] Nonetheless, X asked to be friends with her mother via social media during the last summer, which the father forbade her to do. analysis the new motive of compromission [ 49 ] The Director claims that considering all the recent events in the father’s life, the child is now at serious risk of neglect. [ 50 ] This motive of compromission is defined at

section 38 b) 2) of the Youth Protection Act [2] that reads as follows: “(2) a situation in which there is a serious risk that a child’s parents or the person having custody of the child are not providing for the child’s basic needs in the manner referred to in subparagraph 1” [ 51 ] “Subparagraph 1” refers to neglect for failing to meet the child’s physical needs (i), physical or mental health care needs (ii) or appropriate supervision, support or otherwise educational needs (iii). [ 52 ] The Tribunal found that there were elements leading to neglect in X’s situation. [ 53 ] More particularly, in the fall of 2021 when X was spending more time at her father’s place, there was a time when she went to school without the proper winter clothes and boots because she forgot them at the foster family’s place. [ 54 ] When the delegate suggested that the father could go get them since they live a few minutes apart, the father said that he does not go there and remained firm in his decision. [ 55 ] The school also reported that X had sometimes been late which affected her behaviour in school. [ 56 ] Moreover, the teacher said that X has not been respectful and that she opposes herself to the teacher when she is at her father’s place. [ 57 ] The Tribunal thus finds that child was at serious risk of neglect. [ 58 ] On the other hand, the Tribunal also finds that the resurgence of the father’s diffi-culty controlling his anger and his emotions exposes the child psychological ill-treatment. [ 59 ] This motive can be found at paragraph c) of

section 38 YPA and reads as follows: “( c ) “psychological ill-treatment” refers to a situation in which a child is seriously or repeatedly subjected to behaviour on the part of the child’s parents or another person that could cause harm to the child, and the child’s parents fail to take the necessary steps to put an end to the situation. Such behaviour includes in particular indifference, denigration, emotional rejection, excessive control, isolation, threats, exploitation, particularly if the child is forced to do work disproportionate to the child’s capacity, and exposure to conjugal or domestic violence;”

[ 60 ] The Tribunal finds that the psychological ill-treatment derives from the child’s exposure to her father’s lack of emotional control, anger and the climate of conflict at the paternal home. [ 61 ] Even though the child is not the main subject of his anger, exposure to a parent who is often mad or cross at other people or situations could cause psychological harm as it can inflict upon a child stress and anxiety. [ 62 ] The child never knows when the parent will explode and can thus be in a state of hypervigilance which is detrimental to her development. [ 63 ] This is why the Tribunal finds that X’s security and development is also endangered for the motive of psychological ill- treatment.

The measures [ 64 ] X mostly needs stability. She has to be reassured regarding her situation and continue to benefit from a structured routine. [ 65 ] She needs to feel that she has her place in both families, because she identifies herself with both. She has to be allowed to make this choice without feeling guilty. [ 66 ] The child has built significant relationships with Ms. C and Mr. D' family, but also with their extended family members. [ 67 ] The father is going through a difficult phase. Some aspects of his relationship with Ms. E strangely resembles the ones he had with Ms.

F. [ 68 ] The Tribunal recommended to the father to go back to Ressources pour Hommes to address his unresolved issues. [ 69 ] The father had contacted the organism recently but had not followed through with an actual meeting. [ 70 ] He should also address his drug use which contributes to his loss of control of his emotions. [ 71 ] He must make this effort in order to get better and thus allow for more contacts with his children. [ 72 ] X needs to have a peaceful environment when she goes to her father’s home and not be exposed to conflict and her father’s anger. [ 73 ] It would also be important that the father tell X that it is “ok” for her to be with Ms.

C and Mr.

D and that he is glad that she is happy there and that they take good care of her. [ 74 ] This would mean the world to X and he would be the first to benefit from the child’s affection for this given permission. [ 75 ] This being said, the Director has announced that the intended so supervise the next visits with the father. [ 76 ] The court disagrees with this recommendation. [ 77 ] The evidence does not suggest that the father has been inappropriate directly with X. [ 78 ] When that Director suggests that contacts be suspended because the father is not well, he agreed. [ 79 ] X is an adolescent with a strong relationship with her father, she wants to see him. [ 80 ] There is no indication that the father would not continue to collaborate with the modality set by the Director. [ 81 ] The minimum of contacts should also be every other weekend, unless otherwise agreed between the parties. [ 82 ] As for the measures regarding the mother, the recommendations to prohibit contacts, to withdraw the exercise of certain of her parental attributes and to give them to the father are well founded. [ 83 ] On the other hand, the Tribunal will not allow the resumption of mother-child contacts under any condition. [ 84 ] This should be addressed to the court if the mother was ever to start collaborating with the social follow up. [ 85 ] The court will then see if contacts with X, after so many years, would be in her best interest. [ 86 ] Having read the report and heard the delegate’s and the father’s testimony, the Court finds that the evolution of the situation gives way to most of the recommended measures.

FOR ALL THESE MOTIVES THE COURT: GRANTS the present application; DECLARES that the security and development of the X are still in danger on the grounds of neglect on the educational level, serious risk of neglect and psychological ill-treatment ; REVISES the Court order rendered on July 29th, 2021 in the present file; ORDERS the placement of the child X in the kinship foster family of Ms. C and Mr. D;

AUTHORIZES, in the child’s favor, contacts with the father, according to agreement between the parties; if no agreement is reached, contact will be made every other weekend; TAKE JUDICIAL ACT the father’s commitment not to use drugs while the child is in his care; TAKE JUDICIAL ACT the father’s commitment not to expose the youth to conflict; PROHIBITS all contacts between the child and her mother; ORDERS that the parents report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in their own regards or in their child’s regard to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is in danger; ORDERS that the child and her parents take an active

part in the application of any of the measures ordered, namely that they collaborate to the elaboration of the intervention plan and the social follow-up; WITHDRAWS from the mother the exercise of certain attributes of parental authority as it pertains to passports and the travel needs, educational needs, spare-time activities, healthcare needs and driving licence; AUTHORIZES the father to exercise alone the attributes of parental authority withdrawn from de mother; ORDERS that a person working for CIUSSS A or any other establishment or body, provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and her father as well as her mother, at her express request, until the child’s majority, on […], 2028; ENTRUST the situation of child X to the Director of Youth Protection to see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ PASCALE BERARDINO, J.C.Q.

M e Nicolas Bastien Counsel for the DYP M e Maryse Pinsonneault Counsel for the child M e Mireille Leblanc Counsel for the father Deposited exhibit: D-22