2020 QCCQ 3162, 2020 QCCQ 3162

Protection de la jeunesse — 204302 2020 QCCQ 3162 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 145-51-000027-207 DATE: July 10, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION Applicant -and- X born on […] Child -and- C (DECEASED) A Parents -and- B Proposed Tutor -and- LE CURATEUR PUBLIC DU QUÉBEC Implicated party ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON A APPLICATION TO APPOINT A TUTOR ______________________________________________________________________ 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 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] An application to appoint a tutor to the child is referred to the Court by the Director of youth protection (DYP) in respect of X, pursuant to

section 70.1 of the Youth Protection Act . [ 2 ] The father is not present at the hearing, but he advises the social worker that he was in agreement with the demand. The Public Curator did not appear. [ 3 ] The child’s counsel and the proposed tutor consent to the conclusions of the application. Documentary evidence is filed, notably a psychosocial report. The proposed tutor also testifies. [ 4 ] The evidence reveals that the child is very well adapted to the family of the proposed tutor who happens to be her maternal grandparents.

Since the death of the mother on June 2010, the maternal grandmother has taken care of the child most of the time. Starting on July 2010, it was full time. The proposed tutor is able to provide a constant and positive figure in her life as well as a stable living environment. The child is entrusted to the maternal grandparents, under youth protection orders, since she was […] years old. However, they have been involved in the child’s life since her birth. [ 5 ] The child is doing very well in every sphere of her life.

She is excelling in school and with all her extracurricular activities more particularly swimming. The proposed tutor indicates that she is very close to her granddaughter and she shares a good bond. She takes very good care of her and is committed to continue doing so for the future. [ 6 ] The father is not very implicated even if he lives nearby. The child does not wish to have contact with him since he is always intoxicated. Through the years, the father has not been consistent regarding visits with his daughter. He does attend any of her activities nor any of her birthdays.

The latter has never assumed parental responsibilities. He has not shown any interest for his child. He has a lot of personal difficulties, particularly with alcohol and drugs. Contacts with the father or his extended family are managed by the proposed tutor when the child chooses to see them. [ 7 ] The child was already entrusted to her maternal grandmother, Mrs. B until she reaches her majority. The latter demonstrates a real interest towards the child and she has the skills to give her all that she needs.

Moreover, neither the child nor Mrs .B needs the support of the DYP anymore. [ 8 ] Considering the report, the evidence and

section 207 of the Civil code of Québec , the Court concludes, in the interest of the

child, that the appointment of a tutor is appropriate. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 9 ] GRANTS the application to appoint a tutor; [ 10 ] APPOINTS Mrs. B as a tutor for the child X; [ 11 ] ENTRUSTS the child X to Mrs. B; [ 12 ] ORDERS the youth protection delegate to keep the DYP’s file of the child until she reaches majority. __________________________________ CELESTINA ALMEIDA, J.C.Q. Me Mylène Pelletier-Rivet for the applicant Me Ann-Chloé Boudreau for the child Mr. A(absent) the father Mrs. B The proposed tutor Le Curateur public du Québec (absent) The implicated party Date of hearing: July 8, 2020