2016 QCCQ 10993, 2016 QCCQ 10993

Protection de la jeunesse — 164794 2016 QCCQ 10993 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT [...] TOWN [...] Youth Division Nos.: 640-41-001944-153 and 640-41-001945-150 DATE: August 22, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X, born on […], 2012 Y, born on […], 2011 MR [SOCIAL WORKER 1], youth protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection of the A C.Y.P.C., working in Town A, Quebec, District A Applicant and MRS A, residing and domiciled in Town A, Quebec, District A Mother and MR B, presently detained in Centre federal de formation of Laval in Laval, Quebec, District of Laval Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Sections 95 (par. 1) and 75 YPA, RSQ c.

P-34.1 ) ______________________________________________________________________ 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 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 YPA). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection of the Inuulitsivik C.Y.P.C. asks the Court to review the decisions rendered on December 9, 2015, by the Honourable Lise Gagnon, J.C.Q., concerning the situation of Y, born on […], 2011, and X, born on […], 2012.

After declaring their situation in danger, Mrs Judge Gagnon ordered their placement in foster family with other measures until June 17, 2016. Now, the applicant wants the extension of their placement for another year. [ 2 ] The mother, present at the hearing, is assisted by Me Marie-Claude De Gagné. The father is detained and is absent. The children are represented by Me Cassandra Neptune. Me Aubrée Coutanson assists the applicant. [ 3 ] Even, if she admits many allegations, the mother disagrees with the recommendations.

She wants her children back with her immediately. [ 4 ] A revision report is filed and the social worker testifies. In defence, the mother also testifies. [ 5 ] It is proved that the situation of the parents remains the same. They still have issues of substance abuse and conjugal violence. The father is currently detained and should be released in June 2017. [ 6 ] The mother lives with her sister, Mrs C, at the house of the maternal grandmother who fosters both children. The mother has a history of criminal offences, most of them related to violence.

She displays personal problems, particularly alcohol and substance abuse on regular basis. The police deals often with the mother and her sister C. [ 7 ] The mother's situation is the same. She did not collaborate with the social worker nor seek for help at social services. [ 8 ] The child Y is developing behavioural problems. He is violent, hits other children, does not respect authority and is expelled from daycare since February 2016. X attends the daycare regularly. [ 9 ] The grandmother works and is often absent from home. She has hard time to supervise the children.

She also takes care of Sarah's two children. The mother often intervenes and she and the grandmother do not inform the social worker of the situation. The mother refuses the services of the Director of Youth Protection and does not show any motivation to resolve her issues. [ 10 ] The children are vulnerable and have witnessed many violent incidents. The mother minimizes all the situations and she is reluctant to talk. It is only when confronted with information the social worker gets from the daycare, the police and other people that the mother confirmed.

[ 11 ] The new social worker is in the file since May 2016. From notes of the previous, he believes that the children should be placed in a different foster family but he did not find one yet. [ 12 ] The mother still denies her problems and does not want the children to move in another family. [ 13 ] Considering the recurrence of the parents' problems, their non-collaboration and their denial, the Court believes that the children might face a long-term placement eventually. Considering the dispositions of the Youth Protection Act, particularly

section 91.1, when the duration of their placement will reach the total period of 18 months and no significant changes will be made by the parents, the Director of Youth protection is obliged to present a life project for them. [ 14 ] Consequently, if the mother really wants to change her way of living and seeks for help, the Court believes that a six-month placement is sufficient to show her real motivation. It is also sufficient for the children and in their best interest. [ 15 ] The Court recommends that a written plan of intervention be provided to the mother with

schedule of meetings, in such way that she will be structured in her follow-up.

The Court also recommends the Director of Youth Protection to inform the foster parent, the maternal grandmother, that she has the obligation to report all the problematic situations to the social worker, and if not, she might loose her status. [ 16 ] Considering the evidence, THE COURT: [ 17 ] GRANTS the motions; [ 18 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X and Y are still in danger; [ 19 ] ORDERS the placement of X and Y in a foster family, chosen by the Director of Youth Protection for a period of six months; [ 20 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counselling and assistance to the children and the parents for a period of six months; [ 21 ] ORDERS the mother to seek services for her alcohol and personal issues; [ 22 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to supervise the contacts between the children and the parents (frequency, duration and degree of supervision); [ 23 ] ORDERS that the parents remain sober in presence of the children; [ 24 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide for X the services of an educator; [ 25 ] ORDERS the parents to meet the social worker regularly and to collaborate actively with him; [ 26 ] RECOMMENDS that the Director of Youth Protection evaluate the grandmother as a foster family and fix strict conditions to be respected; [ 27 ] ORDERS the police to collaborate to the execution of the present judgment; [ 28 ] ENTRUSTS the children's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing this judgment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Me Aubrée Coutanson Attorney for the applicant Me Marie-Claude De Gagné Attorney for the mother Me Cassandra Neptune Attorney for the children Date of hearing: July 12, 2016