2011 QCCQ 7614, 2011 QCCQ 7614

Protection de la jeunesse — 111994 2011 QCCQ 7614 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OD [...] “Youth Division” DATE: May 18, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE PRESENCE OF THE HONOURABLE DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: Nos: 640-41-001082-087 X 2007-[…] 640-41-001083-085 Y 2004-[…] MS. [SOCIAL WORKER 1], Youth Protection Worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A of Town A, Quebec, district A Applicant And MRS.

A, residing and domiciled in Town B, Quebec , district A Mother And MR. B, residing and domiciled in Town C, Quebec, district A Father ______________________________________________________________________ JL2340 JUDGMENT (Section 95 (1) Y.P.A. , chap. P-34.1 R.S.Q. ) [ 1 ] Ms. [SOCIAL WORKER 1], delegate to the Director of Youth Protection A of Town A, is seizing the Court of motions to review the last judgments rendered on December 16, 2009 by Honourable Judge Jacques R. Roy.

She is asking that both children be placed in a foster family until their majority. [ 2 ] At the hearing in town D on March 24, 2011, the parents are absent, but the father is represented by Me Claude Beaudet.

Me Yan Massé represents the children and Me Robert-André Adam, the applicant. [ 3 ] Considering that the files were postponed twice since January 24, that the delay for the provisional measures has now expired, that the mother refused transportation and expenses offered to attend Court, that she is no longer in therapy because she ended it last March 5 after only two weeks, that the father was released from jail last March 13 and is now available for the hearing, but is absent, the Court accepts to proceed to the hearing in their absence.

They had all the facilities and opportunities to attend the hearing, but they did not show any motivation to do so. [ 4 ] The evidence is based on the revision reports as well as on the testimonies of the Social Worker and the foster mother. [ 5 ] The situation of Y and X were declared in danger on February 20, 2008 because of the parents' negligence. At the time, the parents had serious problems with both alcohol and drugs and with violence; they were unable to provide a safe and secure environment to the children. Consequently, the children were placed in a foster family for one year.

On March 23, 2009, the measures were extended

for nine months and they were also extended for another year on December 8, 2009. Every time, different measures were ordered to the parents concerning their problems. [ 6 ] Now, the evidence reveals that the parents did not respect the Court orders, and the problem situation has remained. They did not seek help from the psychologist, the CLSC worker or the worker A. [ 7 ] The father is not regularly involved in the children's life. The last time he talked to the Social Worker was last July 2010.

He does not show any motivation or collaboration. [ 8 ] The mother did not succeed her fourth therapy, does not have a stable place to live, is now staying in a shelter in Town E as she did before, and she is unable to assume parental responsibilities. [ 9 ] She has not come back to Town B since last November. She contacted the children a few times over the phone, made them promises that she was unable to keep. She always blames the Social Worker for the situation she is in, and she does not accept any confrontation. [ 10 ] All the children are now living in the same foster family.

Y joined his brother in the C family a few months ago. He has well adapted to the family and at school. X enjoys the company of his brother and has also well adapted to the foster family. Mrs. C knows the children very well, she has been their foster family for three years. [ 11 ] Mrs. C and her spouse, Mr. D, are ready to get involved with the children on a long-term basis. They foster other children as well, placed by the A. They offer good collaboration with the Social Worker, respect the native culture and want the children to learn it.

They also respect the parents and their rights. [ 12 ] They noticed that Y reacts negatively when his mother makes promises that she does not keep. They also observed that the children are waiting for their mother although they have not seen her since last October and have not talked to her for at least two weeks. [ 13 ] The Social Worker testifies that she trusts the foster parents and declares that they are able to assume the children on a long- term basis.

She does not have any foster families available in her community and she cannot refer the children to other neighbouring communities because they also have a shortage of foster families.

The Social Worker, in her follow-up, will manage to ensure that the children develop their native culture and traditions. [ 14 ] Also, because of the parents' instability, she amended her petition and requested that parental authority be withdrawn from the parents and entrusted to the foster parents, so they might be in a position to sign medical, social and school authorizations for the benefit of the children. [ 15 ] Considering the evidence, [ 16 ] Considering

section 91.1 of the Youth Protection Act and the fact that the total foster care period for these children has already exceeded the limits, [ 17 ] Considering the children's best interest, [ 18 ] FOR THESE MOTIVES, THE COURT: [ 19 ] GRANTS the petitions; [ 20 ] DECLARES that the security and development of X and Y are still in danger; [ 21 ] ORDERS the placement of the two children X and Y in a foster family until they reach majority; [ 22 ] ORDERS that the children remain in the foster family of Mrs. C and Mr.

D; [ 23 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to provide aid, counsel and assistance to the children and the parents for the duration of the judgment; [ 24 ] WITHDRAWS parental authority from the parents, and AUTHORISES the foster parents to sign all the medical, school and social authorizations required for the children's benefit; [ 25 ] ORDERS the Director of Youth Protection to supervise all contacts, visit rights and access of the parents to the children, and sets a minimum of one contact and visit a month for each parent; [ 26 ] ORDERS any police officer to collaborate in the execution of the present Court order; [ 27 ] ENTRUSTS the children’s situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing this enactment. __________________________________ DENYSE LEDUC, J.C.Q.

Me Robert-André Adam, attorney for the applicant Me Claude Beaudet, attorney for the father Me Yan Massé, attorney for the children Date of hearing: March 24, 2011