I will not return to the problems discussed all week around the DPJ. There were serious breaches. The minister was shaken. We have changed national director of youth protection, let’s hope for the best for the future.
I don’t want to minimize these problems, but I believe we need to broaden our thinking and look at things head on. What we are asking of the DPJ is no longer reasonable. It is extremely difficult to find the necessary staff and maintain the motivation to work there. Many of those who dedicate themselves to it have sent CVs to other social services.
I see two major issues that seem highly taboo. Society blames staff and blames managers, but never dares to ask these difficult questions.
Too many cases
First observation: the increase in the number of reports year after year represents an aberration. Especially with such low birth rates in recent years, this is a shame. Let’s put it bluntly: Quebec has never had so few children and we cannot take care of them properly.
Over the past two years, the DYPs in various regions have received more than 135,000 reports. Ten years ago, this figure had just exceeded 80,000. Although we may say that people are more aware and quicker to report cases, such an increase makes no sense.
The Laurent Commission has prioritized support for parents. It will certainly be necessary to take action to reduce the number of interventions required from the DPJ. I stand by my comments on the degradation of the social fabric.
Young offenders
The other big question is even trickier. Should we ask the same organization to make interventions worthy of Mother Teresa with abandoned or abused children and to take care of minor members of street gangs convicted by the courts?
This is a fairly unique choice that Quebec has made: young offenders, even those who have committed the worst crimes, are placed under the direction of social services, in centers that report to the DPJ. In some cases, they come into too close contact with young people who have done nothing wrong and who are in protection.
Quebec has always been proud of its distinct model. In France, there are juvenile sections in penitentiary establishments for serious offenders. In the UK they are kept in ‘Her Majesty’s Young Offenders Institutes’. In Ontario, more serious cases fall under Public Safety, not social services. If no one imitates us, maybe it’s because we’re making a mistake.
Yes, we must keep the spirit of rehabilitation for young people, but taking them out of the DPJ dome could help everyone. The DPJ must take less, but take care of it.
