The District Court made care orders until age 18 for three children after finding that an infant had suffered serious non-accidental injuries and that his parents had failed to protect him. The judge said the evidence did not establish which parent caused the injuries, and did not exonerate either.
The Health Service Executive (HSE) applied under section 18 of the Child Care Act 1991. The case, heard over seven days, concerned three siblings identified in the judgment as Child 1, Child 2 and Child 3. Their mother was their sole legal guardian. Father 2 was the father of the two younger children but was not their legal guardian. Father 1, the father of Child 1, did not participate in the full care hearing.
Medical evidence showed that Child 3, aged four months, had a skull fracture, bleeding around the brain and new and old retinal haemorrhages. Experts said the injuries involved considerable force and could not have been caused in the way described by the mother, who had first given a fabricated account and later said a five-year-old niece had dropped the baby. The judge found neither explanation credible. The medical evidence indicated at least two, and possibly three, episodes of trauma.
The judge found both parents and a family friend were within the likely pool of potential perpetrators. The court could not decide whether either parent caused the injuries. It found the mother’s parents were within a wider pool of possible perpetrators, but not reasonably likely to have caused the injuries.
The court did not find sufficient evidence to establish that the earlier injuries for which Child 1 and Child 2 had been hospitalised were non-accidental. It did find that their welfare had been avoidably impaired or neglected because of inadequate supervision and parenting, and that neither parent could care for the children alone without a very high level of support.
The judge rejected a supervision order as insufficient to protect the children and found full care orders proportionate after alternatives had been considered. The orders placed all three children in HSE care until they reach 18. The judgment says the care plan proposed a shared long-term foster placement and supervised parental access; the court directed that access remain at the HSE’s discretion and that it reassess the mother’s access within a protective framework, including the possibility of unsupervised contact.
The court directed a review in three years to assess the possibility of reunification with the mother. The HSE must review the care plans’ approach to access and then review them annually. The court also directed the HSE to support both parents’ meaningful participation in family welfare conferences and care-plan reviews.