2010 QCCQ 15758, 2010 QCCQ 15758

Protection de la jeunesse — 106436 2010 QCCQ 15758 JL3389 QUÉBEC COURT CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] « Youth Division »

N° : 525-41-023934-102 DATE : December 9 th , 2010 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING JUDGE : THE HONOURABLE MICHÈLE LEFEBVRE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ In the matter of : X Born on […] 1996. [SOCIAL WORKER 1], in his capacity as person duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A applicant - and - A , the mother - and - B , the father respondents ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (section 38 Y.P.A.) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The present judgment confirms in writing the decision rendered orally at the hearing held on December 9 th , 2010. [ 2 ] The Court is seized in conformity with

section 38 of the Youth Protection Act with a demand that the security or development of X be declared to be in danger for the reasons alleged in paragraph 3 of the declaration. [ 3 ] Essentially, le Director of Youth Protection sustains: 3.1 The adolescent is in the care of the father, and has sporadic contact with the mother; 3.2 The adolescent behaves in such a way as to repeatedly or seriously undermine her physical or psychological integrity, and she objects to steps taken to put an end to the situation; 3.3 The adolescent does not respect house rules or parental authority; 3.4 The adolescent does not respect curfew, returning home on a regular basis after 11 p.m.; 3.5 The adolescent frequently leaves home for extended periods, including several days at a time, without permission and without informing her father of her whereabouts; 3.6 The adolescent is frequently absent from school, skipping periods as well as numerous full days; 3.7 Frequent arguments have occurred between the adolescent and the father around her disregard of the rules;

3.8 In early September 2010, at the request of the father, the adolescent was provisionally placed in a rehabilitation centre, where she was able to respect the rules and structure; 3.9 In mid-October 2010, around one (1) week after her return to the father's care, the adolescent reverted to her previous negative behavioural pattern; 3.10 During October 2010, an educator was made available for the family, but the family did not remain consistently involved; 3.11 Despite efforts to engage the mother, she remained uninvolved in the intervention; 3.12 On November 4 th , 2010, in a meeting with the educator and the youth protection worker, the father again expressed that he was overwhelmed by the adolescent's behaviour; 3.13 At that time, the adolescent stated that she did not wish to reside with her father; 3.14 From November 4 th to November 8 th , 2010, the adolescent remained absent from home without reporting her whereabouts, and has not attended school; 3.15 On November 8 th , 2010, the adolescent reported that she was with her mother since the day before; 3.16 The adolescent requires placement in a structured setting; [ 4 ] The Director of Youth Protection recommended that X be entrusted to her mother's care with social follow up for a period of one (1) year, and that measures be applied in order to correct the situation, as appears in the Court record. [ 5 ] The mother, while informed of her right to be represented or assisted by attorney, chose to proceed without attorney and declared to be in agreement with the measures recommended by the Director of Youth Protection, as appears in the Court record. [ 6 ] The father, while informed of his right to be represented or assisted by attorney, chose to proceed without attorney and declared to be in agreement with the measures recommended by the Director of Youth Protection, as appears in the Court record. [ 7 ] The adolescent, through her attorney, declared to be in agreement with the measures recommended by the Director of Youth Protection, as appears in the Court record [ 8 ] By consent and to serve as evidence, the Director of Youth Protection filed the following documents: D-1: Child's birth certificate; D-2: Court report, by [Social Worker 1], dated December 1 st , 2010; ANALYSIS OF THE EVIDENCE AND DECISION [ 9 ] The Court finds from the evidence, that X (14 years old) and her 3 siblings have been raised by their father.

X has had hardly any contact with her mother since approximately six (6) years. [ 10 ] Recently, X has started acting out at home, not respecting her father's house rules. At the same time, she has sought out a rapprochement with her mother. She has spent weekends at her mother's which have gone well.

She now wishes to live there. [ 11 ] The Director of Youth Protection is recommending this plan with which both parents are in agreement. [ 12 ] Therefore, having received the admissions of the parties, taken into consideration the reports submitted, the Court concludes that the allegations have been proven to its satisfaction and permit the measures to be applied. [ 13 ] CONSEQUENTLY, AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 14 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 15 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X are considered to be in danger within the meaning of the Youth Protection Act. [ 16 ] IN VIRTUE OF THE POWERS CONFERRED UPON THE COURT BY

SECTION 91 OF THE YOUTH PROTECTION ACT: [ 17 ] ORDERS that X be entrusted to her mother’s care; [ 18 ] ORDERS that the mother report periodicaly to the Director on the measures applied to put an end to the situation in which the security and the development are endangered; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the parents and X take an active

part in the applications of the measures ordered, and namely that X attend school, respect house rules and inform her parents of her whereabouts at all time; [ 20 ] ORDERS that both parents inform the Director of any change of address;

[ 21 ] ORDERS that both parents ensure that X is not exposed to any conflict resulting from their relationship history; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the family participate and collaborate with the recommendations made by the Director and namely the Family preservation program; [ 23 ] ORDERS that contacts between X and her father be facilited by DYP to ensure that these contacts be reinstated during this period; [ 24 ] ORDERS that aid, counsel and assistance be provided to X and her family; [ 25 ] The WHOLE for a period of one (1) year; [ 26 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Direction of the Youth Protection A who shall then see that the measures are carried out and these measures may be executed by any peace officer if necessary; SIGNED AT TOWN A __________________________________ MICHÈLE LEFEBVRE, J.C.Q.

M e Isabelle Loranger Attorney for the applicant M e Alec Fafard Attorney for the adolescent Judgment rendered orally on December 9 th 2010. ML/mlm