2021 QCCQ 17220, 2021 QCCQ 17220

Protection de la jeunesse — 218434 2021 QCCQ 17220 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] «Youth Division» N° : 755-41-003433-219 DATE : August 20, 2021 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDED BY : THE HONORABLE MARIO GERVAIS J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , youth protection worker duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A, Applicant -and- X, born on [...], 2006 Child-respondent -and- A Mother-respondent -and- B Father-respondent ______________________________________________________________________ J U D G E M E N T

Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act ______________________________________________________________________ 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 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A .] [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (the Director) petitions the Court with an application for protection in the matter of the child X , who will turn 15 on [...]. [ 2 ] The Director alleges that the security and the development of the child are in danger for reason of neglect on educational level from her mother. [ 3 ] The Director recommends, as key measures, that the child be entrusted to a foster family with a social follow-up for a period of six months.

Position of the parties and Litigation [ 4 ] All parties admit that the security and the development of the child are in danger for reason of neglect on educational level from her mother. [ 5 ] The mother and the child are in agreement with the measures sought by the Director. [ 6 ] The father contests the placement of the child and asks that the child be entrusted to him.

Description of the situation and Analysis [ 7 ] The situation is known to the Director who has intervened with the family in the context of two voluntary measures enforced from November 13 th , 2019 to August 11 th 2021. [ 8 ] In these documents, the parties admit the following: ➢ The mother is unable to exercise her parental role as an authority figure; ➢ The mother is unable to provide X with the adequate structure; ➢ The family roles and boundaries are diffused between the family members; ➢ The father is unable to exercise his parental role due to distance (Saskatchewan). [ 9 ] The child’s older sister has remained the principal authority figure at home.

Nevertheless, the mother is aware that she must reclaim her role as a mother and implement a structure and a routine of life with clear rules. [ 10 ] Summer 2020, the older sister moved out of the home, which has destabilized the family. [ 11 ] In order to deal with this situation and improve the mother’s abilities, a homebound educator was assigned to the family, with little success.

The mother can be overwhelmed with her emotions or personal issues which affect her abilities to apply the home rules and consequences. [ 12 ] The Court deems important to underline the fact that the mother is a courageous woman who has three children with special needs. There are numerous appointments to attend and the burden of responsibilities is heavy. She regularly has to make sacrifices. [ 13 ] The child has a worrying history of suicidal attempts and self-mutilation that led to many hospitalisations.

She is also diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, but remains highly functional. [ 14 ] On April 12, 2021, the child attempted suicide and was hospitalized. At the time of discharge, the child expressed anxiety with the perspective of going back home since she felt that he mother was unable to resume her car physically and emotionally. [ 15 ] From April 14 to April 16, 2021, the child stayed two days with her older sister. She then integrated a reception center under a Provisional Court Order. [ 16 ] On June 3, 2021, the Court order a gradual reintegration of the child to her mother.

In fact, the child is back home since August 9 2021. [ 17 ] The Director, the mother and the child have come to the conclusion that the child would be better served with a six months placement in a foster home. This period would allow them « to work on themselves and rebuild a relationship where they can trust and appreciate one another again and eventually live together once more » [1] . [ 18 ] The aimed CRDI foster family is made up of two former educator from CRDI. The child has visited the foster family and is enthusiastic about the idea of ​​integrating this living environment.

She also will be able to attend her same school. [ 19 ] With regard to the father’s offer to resume the care of the child, the Court is of the opinion that at this moment of time of child’s life, it is not the best of options. The Court is convinced that the father is well intended. That being said, the fact is that they haven’t seen each other for a while and there contacts are not always positive.

Finally, the child, who’s highly vulnerable, doesn’t want to go to Saskatchewan and be root out. [ 20 ] After having received the admissions, taken the reports produced and the testimonies heard into consideration, the Court concludes that the security and the development of the child are in danger and that the situation gives rise to the measures sought.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 21 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 22 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child X are in danger for reason of parental neglect on educational level; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family; [ 24 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and her parents be set upon agreement between the parties; [ 25 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling and assistance to the child and her family; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the child and her parents take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 27 ] ORDERS that the child and her parents report periodically to the Director to inform her of the evolution of the situation ; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the child receive a psychiatric follow-up as long as deemed required by the professional; [ 29 ] RECOMMENDS that the mother seek psychological support;

[ 30 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child X to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the measures ordered; [ 31 ] THE WHOLE, for a period of six months. ________________________________ Mario Gervais, J.C.Q. M e Frédérique Earls-Bélanger Attorney for the Director M e Lucie Gaucher Attorney for the child M e Alexandre Niquette Attorney for the mother Date of signature: September 1, 2021