2013 QCCQ 18358, 2013 QCCQ 18358

Protection de la jeunesse — 133024 2013 QCCQ 18358 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 610-41-000594-135 610-41-000595-132 610-41-000596-130 DATE: July 11, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JOSÉE BÉLANGER J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: Y, born on [...], 2004 X, born on [...], 2006 Z , born on [...], 2011 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , t.s., exercising her profession at the Centre Jeunesse A, having a place of business at […]in Town A, district A (Quebec) […] Applicant A , residing and domiciled at [...] in TOWN B, district A (Quebec) [...] Mother and B , residing and domiciled at [...] in TOWN B, district A (Quebec) [...] Father ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ( Sections 38 and 75 , Youth Protection Act , R.S.Q. , c.

P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection makes an application to have the security and development of Y, born on [...], 2004, X, born on [...], 2006 and Z, born on [...], 2011 declared in danger pursuant to sections 38 b) 2° of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] Both parents are present and represented by a lawyer. A lawyer also represents the children. [ 3 ] The parties ask the Court to proceed with all the applications within the same hearing. [ 4 ] The parents admit most of the allegations contained in the application.

They admit that the children's situation is compromised pursuant to sections 38 b) 2° of the Youth Protection Act . They agree with the measures recommended by the applicant to wit, to entrust Y and X to their maternal grandfather until the end of the school year and after that to their parents (for

X) and to her mother (for Y). They agree also whit the measures recommended for Z to wit, to entrust her to her parents. All those recommendations are for a period of two years. [ 5 ] The children's lawyer admits that their situation is compromised pursuant to sections 38 b) 2° of the Youth Protection Act .

He agrees with the measures recommended by the applicant. [ 6 ] The Court considers that following the admissions, the documentary evidence and the testimonies there is preponderant evidence of the following facts. [ 7 ] The three children have the same mother. [ 8 ] The children's family has been known from the Youth Protection services for years. [ 9 ] Y is eight years old, X is seven and Z two years old. [ 10 ] Because the parents had difficulty to meet the children's basic needs, the children were the object of decisions rendered by the Court of Quebec from July 2011 to December 2012. [ 11 ] There is a serious risk of neglect for all the children because of the parent's drug and alcohol addiction and also because of the children's educational needs. [ 12 ] Both parents are presently on a methadone treatment.

Both parents deny still using other drugs than methadone. However during December 2012 one of the father's cousins saw the mother shooting herself with morphine. She also admitted the fact to that person.

[ 13 ] In Z 2011, Z was just born and she was suffering from withdrawal from narcotics. She had to be hospitalized for a period of one month before all the withdrawal symptoms were over. The mother had been taking Oxycontin while pregnant. Both parents started the methadone program at that period of time. [ 14 ] Since last February the parents have difficulties to provide to the children's basic needs. [ 15 ] In February 2013, two Youth Protection worker's went to the parent's residence to make sure they were able to take care of the children.

They had to knock several times at the door before the parents opened it. It was 4 h 30 pm and they were sleeping. They were at an activity at the school during the afternoon and had entrusted Z to an aunt. The two other children were left at the school. They were left without supervision on the community after school. When the aunt tried to bring back Z to her parents she knocked several times at the door but had no answer. [ 16 ] On February 20, Z who is two years old has burned herself on the stove. It was a first-degree burn.

The parents explained to the doctor that the child was under the supervision of a seven or eight years old child when it happened. When the child was at the hospital she was left by unattended. [ 17 ] On March 27, X was home alone sick. In the morning the child was not feeling well and the school tried to contact the parents. At 11 h 00 am the mother said after some phone calls that she will pick up the child shortly. At 1 h 00 pm nobody had come at the school to pick him up. The school contacted an aunt who dropped the child home at 2 h 30 pm. At 3 h 45 the child was at home by himself.

The parents could not be located in the community. The house was messy and there was vomit on the floor next to the couch where X was resting. [ 18 ] On April 5, 2013 as an immediate protective measure the Court entrusted X and Y to their maternal grandfather and Z to her parents. [ 19 ] On April 28, Z was seen playing outside by herself. She left the house yard crossed the road and went to a neighbour by herself. The neighbour talked with her for about five minutes but nobody came to get her. Finally he brought her back home.

The parents were in the basement. [ 20 ] Concerning Z's health, her teeth are unhealthy. She needs to be seen by a dentist to confirm possible cavities. The parents have been notified many times concerning that issue but they were waiting on the health card of the child. [ 21 ] Concerning Y she has many unjustified absences in school. Her homework is not always completed and not always signed by the parents. They do not always get up in the morning with the children and that is why they are often late. [ 22 ] Also Y was not appropriately dressed for the weather.

On one occasion she explained that her clothes were in the laundry and that her mother considered that she was old enough to decide which clothe she could wear. [ 23 ] Concerning X's schooling and clothing the situation is the same. Also it was observed that he was not always clean and he was teased in school for that situation. [ 24 ] All the children seem to be in general good health conditions. [ 25 ] The contact with the parents has been difficult throughout the Youth Protection worker's evaluation. They have strong and negative feelings about the Youth Protection.

Many appointments have been scheduled with the parents but they did not attend for different reasons. When surprise visits were done at their residence they were sleeping or most of the time did not answer at the door. [ 26 ] There are serious lacks in the parent's capacities to take care of their children but also positive aspects like the fact they love their children and care for their wellbeing. They provide a stable home environment to them. As for discipline the structure at home is weak as for the children's routine. [ 27 ] The family is residing on the A first nation in Town B.

The parents are together for the past eight years. They are both unemployed. [ 28 ] The bond between the parents and the children is good and appears strong. [ 29 ] After hearing all the evidence and taking into consideration the admissions of the parties the Court is convinced that the applicant's recommendations are appropriated and likely to put an end to the situation in which the security and development of the children are in danger. For these reasons the Court: [ 30 ] Grants the present application; [ 31 ] Declares that the security and development of X, born on [...], 2006 are in danger according to

section 38 b) 2° of the Youth Protection Act ; [ 32 ] Entrusts X to his maternal grandfather, M. C, until the end of the school year, June 21, 2013; [ 33 ] Entrusts X to his parents after the school year is over; [ 34 ] Orders that the parents report periodically to the Director of Youth Protection on the measures they apply in order to put an end to the situation in which the security or development of the child is in danger; [ 35 ] The following measures are for a period of two years;

[ 36 ] Orders that the parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered by the Court; [ 37 ] Orders that the parents participate in a follow-up with the drug and alcohol counsellor (Centre

A) for as long as judged necessary by the professional; [ 38 ] Orders that the parents continue their follow-up with D r Jean-Guy Ricard (for the methadone program) for as long as judged necessary by the professional; [ 39 ] Orders that the parents do not consume drug and alcohol in the presence of the child; [ 40 ] Orders that the parents are not intoxicated in the presence of the child; [ 41 ] Orders that the parents ensure that the child is not in the presence of people under the influence of drug or alcohol; [ 42 ] Orders that the parents undertake to inform the Director of Youth Protection worker of any person that would reside in their residence; [ 43 ] Orders that the parents pursue their follow-up with the First-line services as long as necessary in order to get child's necessary cards and documents (health card, status card and birth certificate); [ 44 ] Orders that the parents ensure that the child is always under the supervision of a responsible person; [ 45 ] Orders that the parents report on the person that takes care of the child; [ 46 ] Orders that a person working for an establishment or organisation provides aid, council and assistance to the child, his parents and his maternal grandfather; [ 47 ] Orders that the parents report in person, at regular intervals, to the Director of Youth Protection to inform him of the current situation; [ 48 ] Orders that the child attends school on a daily basis and without lateness; [ 49 ] Orders that the child attends a childcare establishment for the Z on a regular basis.

The parents will notify in advance the Director of Youth Protection if there is any family activity that the child likes to attend; [ 50 ] Authorizes the Director of Youth Protection to do surprised visits at the residence of the parents; [ 51 ] Authorizes the Director of Youth Protection to have access to medical information with D r Jean-Guy Ricard regarding the parents and only for the purpose of the methadone program; [ 52 ] Recommends that all professionals (including drug and alcohol counsellor, D r Jean-Guy Ricard, First-line services) be permitted to exchange information regarding the child's and the parent's situation; [ 53 ] Orders any police body to collaborate for the purpose of executing this enactment; [ 54 ] Entrusts the child's situation to the Director of Youth Protection for the purpose of executing the measures ordered by the Court. __________________________________ Josée Bélanger, J.C.Q.

Me Julie Lemire, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Sébastien Lebel, attorney for the child Me Peggy Warolin, attorney for the parents Date of hearing: May 28, 2013