The District Court granted care orders for Child 1 and Child 2 until each reaches 18, after finding that their health, development and welfare would suffer without the orders. The court also allowed either parent to apply to discharge an order before that point.
The children were already in Health Service Executive (HSE) care and living together in a residential unit. Earlier care arrangements with a putative stepmother and other caretakers had broken down. The children left their last caretaker in March 2013 alleging mistreatment, which the HSE said it had not substantiated. The caretaker would not accommodate them afterwards.
The judgment said the children had no parent or legal guardian in Ireland. The father had not contacted the HSE for almost a year, and the mother had not initiated contact with the children for several years. The court was satisfied that the father had been served with notice abroad and by email; the mother’s whereabouts were unknown to the HSE and she had not been served. The judge found the children had been abandoned within the meaning of the Child Care Act, 1991.
The HSE had explored family reunification, but the father did not wish the children to return to their country of origin, where he feared for their wellbeing. The judgment recorded that the children’s failed asylum application was under appeal and that judicial review proceedings had also been lodged. The court was told there was a possibility of leave to remain on humanitarian grounds. Their legal status remained unresolved.
The judge heard evidence from the allocated social worker, a team leader and the Guardian ad Litem (GAL), who supported the application and approved the care plans. The court approved those plans and directed that access with either parent, if the mother is located, be arranged under section 37 of the Act.
The HSE must continue efforts to contact both parents and clarify the children’s legal status, and assist them in pursuing leave to remain if their High Court proceedings fail. The case must return to court if either child lacks an allocated social worker for six weeks or has a planned or unplanned change of residential placement. The court set 2 April 2014 for review of Child 1’s aftercare arrangements and a mention concerning Child 2’s aftercare review. It declined to direct the HSE to provide laptops or wi-fi, leaving that decision to the agency.