The reform of the An Act respecting the Québec Parental Insurance Plan (QPIP) aimed in particular to put an end to an injustice with regard to adopted children who, until then, were not entitled to the same legal protection as other children. It is the fruit of a consensus made possible thanks to the non-partisan approach of parliamentarians, enlightened by expertise in paediatrics, social services and law, as well as by various parental associations.
Although the law now traces the path to follow in the granting of parental leave, several collective agreements maintain, or even reiterate, unequal treatment of families and children, as demonstrated by the recent agreement in principle concluded between the Université de Sherbrooke and the Teachers’ Union (SPPUS).
Arguing to act in the name of the right to equality of biological fathers whose five-week leave was shorter than that of an adoptive parent (mother or father) which was 17 weeks, the SPPUS demanded that the two leaves be an equal duration. In doing so, the union forgot that adoption leave was for a long time the only consideration for maternity leave and that the QPIP now recognizes a leave reserved exclusively for adopters in order to take into account the particular profile of adopted children. In fact, most of them present with developmental delays, post-traumatic syndromes, attachment challenges or various physical health problems, including malnutrition and sometimes stressful surgical conditions, making their particularly demanding and complex treatment.
However, according to the agreement in principle reached between the University of Sherbrooke and the SPPUS, the biological parents will be entitled together to 36 weeks during which they will receive 100% of their salary, while the adoptive parents will be entitled to 20 weeks of leave. .
The financial burden therefore imposed on adoptive parents is almost double that of biological parents.
Moreover, by failing to consider that adoptive mothers are much more likely than adoptive fathers to receive QPIP benefits, the unions that choose this strategy, which essentially consists of undressing Jean to dress Paul, are in reality carrying out a gendered struggle in which women bear the brunt of the majority.
In support of their claims, the proponents of this approach hide behind a few court decisions whose legal basis is based on the assertion that there is no significant difference between the care of a child, whether either biological or adopted. However, the scientific literature destroys the validity of this assertion. It is therefore no longer possible, in our view, to establish a difference in treatment between families and children solely on the basis of these decisions. The study of these also shows that unions sometimes use adoption leave as a lever to demand the extension of paternity leave, in return for a reduction in the rights of adopters. The paternity leave granted by the Université de Sherbrooke is now double that provided for by the QPIP. However, this gain is made to the detriment of adopted children who, being more vulnerable, are particularly affected by the reduction in the length of adoption leave. It is precisely to put an end to this discriminatory situation that the law on the QPIP was amended.
While the number of children in the care of the Direction de la protection de la jeunesse is on the rise, the commitment of adults ready to invest themselves, as parents, with these children with special needs is more important than ever. . So, when some are ready to take up this challenge, they should be able to count on the support of their community, including that of their employer and their union.
* Co-signatories: André Lebon, Vice-President of the Special Commission on Children’s Rights and Youth Protection (CSDEPJ); Danielle Tremblay, Commissioner, CSDEPJ; Alain Roy, law professor at the University of Montreal; Dominique Goubau, associate professor of law at Laval University; Johanne Clouet, professor of law at the University of Montreal; Pierre-François Mercure, professor of law at the University of Sherbrooke; Anne-Marie Piché, professor of social work at UQAM; Geneviève Pagé, professor of social work at the University of Quebec in Outaouais; Marie-Andrée Poirier, Professor, School of Social Work, University of Montreal; Sonia Hélie, researcher at the University Institute for Young People in Difficulty, CIUSSS du Centre-Sud-de-l’Île-de-Montréal; Doris Châteauneuf, researcher at the Center for University Research on Youth and Families; Johanne Lemieux, psychotherapist at the Québec Adoption Consultation Office; Marielle Tardif, President of the Federation of Adoptive Parents of Quebec (FPAQ); Marie Simard, Coordinator, Québec Adoption Consultation Committee (COCON adoption); Mira Tremblay-Laprise, President, Federation of Associations of Single-Parent and Blended Families of Quebec (FAFMRQ); Francine Goyette, President, Confederation of Family Organizations of Quebec (COFAQ).