r v. A, 2015 QCCQ 14065

Protection de la jeunesse — 153191 2015 QCCQ 14065 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 760-41-004737-147 DATE: August 10, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ X Born: […], 2014 Child ______________________________________________________________________ THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION OF LE CENTRE JEUNESSE A Petitioner v.

A Parent ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ 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 ] The Director of Youth Protection presents a motion for extension of a Court decision rendered on October 8, 2014 as to X born on […], 2014, [ 2 ] Within the last order, the Court declares that the security and the development of the child are in danger due to a situation of serious risk of neglect.

As well as entrusting the child to foster care and providing for the supervision of his contacts with his mother, the Court provides for the application of various other protective measures for a period of 9 months. [ 3 ] By the present motion, the Director invokes that the child’s best interests justify the extension of the protective measures for one year, notably in reason that the mother continues to be overwhelmed by her personal difficulties. [ 4 ] Although the mother receives service of the motion and signals her intention to be present for the hearing, she fails to present herself.

After waiting a reasonable time, the Court proceeds on the motion in the best interests of the child. [ 5 ] Considering X’s age, his attorney acts in virtue a legal mandate. After evaluating the evidence, she declares being in agreement with the orientation proposed by the Director. She asks that the Court take act that the child will remain in his present foster home. [ 6 ] Analysis and decision [ 7 ] Since August 7, 2014, X remains in foster care and as of November, in a resource available to receive him on a long term basis.

He is evolving positively in this milieu. [ 8 ] Initially, the parties agree to a calendar of visits between X and his mother on a twice weekly basis, each access for a period of two hours. Considering her previous inconsistency as to the visits, the parties agree that the mother will confirm her presence in advance. On a consistent basis, the mother fails to confirm her contacts or cancels them. Overall, she only attends 5 visits with her son, the last of which is in January 2015. [ 9 ] As the visits with his mother lessen, they become less beneficial for X. He becomes irritable and requires reassurance.

He cries frequently and seems to not recognize his mother. [ 10 ] The mother’s personal situation is static. She continues to be overwhelmed by a myriad of issues, which encompasses all spheres of her life (financial, residential, mental health, etc.).

[ 11 ] In February, the mother informs the Director that she is pregnant with her fourth child with her ex-partner, with whom there is a restraining order in reason of conjugal violence. She gives birth to this child on […], 2015. [ 12 ] The mother is little available for meetings with the Director and there are significant periods when her whereabouts are unknown and she provides no information as to her situation.

Despite numerous attempts, the caseworker is unable to communicate with the mother as of April 2015. [ 13 ] A Comité décisionnel pour un projet de vie is held in June 2015, following which it is determined to undertake proceedings to declare X judicially admissible to adoption.

Such proceedings are underway. [ 14 ] After taking into consideration the evidence, the Court considers that the allegations in the proceeding are proven to its satisfaction and furthermore, give rise to the measures sought. [ 15 ] The evidence demonstrates that the mother’s lifestyle is incompatible with her son’s needs and that she is chronically unable to assume her parental responsibilities.

The situation of endangerment is therefore as present as initially determined and requires protective measures to ensure that X is not put at risk of neglect, including his being maintained in foster care. [ 16 ] The Court takes act that the Director intends to maintain X in his present foster home, which corresponds to his best interests, in view of the permanency plan to be elaborated. [ 17 ] Considering the history of the contacts between X and his mother, the Court agrees that it is necessary that any renewal of these be conditional to the mother meeting with the Director and demonstrating her willingness and ability to be a significant presence in her son’s life. [ 18 ] The Court calculates the expiration of the maximum delays of placement provided within the Youth Protection Act .

Although it is still conceivable that the mother’s personal situation evolve, the evidence, in conjunction with the period of placement to date, justify that the Director move forward with the permanency plan determined for the child, and the undersigned takes act of this intention as corresponding to his best interests. [ 19 ] FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the motion for extension of a Court decision; [ 21 ] DECLARES that the security and the development of the child are still in danger; [ 22 ] EXTENDS the Court order rendered on October 8, 2014; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a foster family chosen by the Director of Youth Protection A; [ 24 ] TAKES ACT of the intention of Director to maintain the child in his present foster family; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the contacts between the child and his mother be upon agreement between the parties, in the presence of a third party chosen by the Director and that the mother confirm her presence 48 hours prior to the visit; [ 26 ] TAKES ACT of the Director's agreement to access, will be conditional to previous scheduled meetings with the mother in order to clarify her personal situation, her intentions as to her son and her ability to be available for him; [ 27 ] ORDERS that a person working for an institution or body provide aid, counselling or assistance to the child and his family; [ 28 ] ORDERS that the mother of child take an active

part in the application of the measures ordered; [ 29 ] ORDERS the mother to inform the Director of Youth Protection of any change of address and telephone number; [ 30 ] TAKES ACT of the Director intention to proceed to the elaboration of a permanency plan; [ 31 ] ALL THESE MEASURES for a period of one (1) year; [ 32 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child to the Director of Youth Protection A for the execution of the judgment. __________________________________ BÉATRICE CLÉMENT, J.C.Q. Me Frédérique Dupuy Attorney for the Petitioner Me Karine P. Poissant Attorney for the child Date of hearing: August 10, 2015