Judgment: 2014-01-17 · Court archive

District Court directs joint referral for psychological assessment of two children

The court set directions for choosing a suitably qualified professional and sharing relevant documents, with the mother entitled to provide contemporaneous objections or rebuttals.

An Chúirt Dúiche / The District Court · [2014] IEDC 01

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Child and Family Agency (CFA) (Applicant)
What

The court set directions for choosing a suitably qualified professional and sharing relevant documents, with the mother entitled to provide contemporaneous objections or rebuttals.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Why

Read the report below for the decision and any reasons given.

The District Court has directed the appointment of a suitably qualified professional to assess two children in ongoing care proceedings, with the assessment to proceed through a joint referral and a scheduled list of available documents.

The Child and Family Agency (CFA) is seeking a care order under section 18 of the Child Care Act 1991. The children remain in the CFA’s care under interim care orders while that application awaits a hearing. The court was dealing with three applications for directions under section 47 of the Act, not deciding whether to make the care order.

The CFA and the respondent mother agreed that the children should be assessed by a clinical psychologist. They disagreed about whether social work reports should be provided to the assessor. The CFA said the reports contained essential background information and that the mother could identify disputed matters. The mother argued that the process had to be fair and transparent, said she disputed much of the reports’ contents, and proposed that the assessor receive summaries of the reports and of her disagreements.

A clinical psychologist who was not to conduct the assessment gave evidence that an assessor would need relevant background information, including the social work reports, and should triangulate evidence before reaching an opinion. The judge noted that the proposed assessment could address the causes of the children’s behaviour and might therefore inform threshold issues in the care proceedings.

The court said the expert should decide which information to inspect. Any social work reports requested from the schedule must be supplied, accompanied by an explanation that, unless fully admitted or proven in court, they may include disputed matters or material that is hearsay or otherwise inadmissible. The court also said that the expert’s curriculum vitae should be available to all parties before a joint instruction, and that communications between the expert and either side should be recorded and shared promptly.

The court directed the parties to appoint a suitably qualified professional, prepare a joint referral letter and compile a schedule of available documents. The professional is to receive the documents identified as necessary from that schedule. If reports are provided, the mother may send objections, denials or rebuttals to the expert at the same time.

The directions resolve how the assessment is to be arranged and how documents may be shared. They do not determine the pending application for a care order or the truth of disputed statements in the reports.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review