The District Court made a care order for Child 1 until his 18th birthday, after hearing the Health Service Executive’s application under section 18 of the Child Care Act 1991. The decision was delivered on 26 September 2012, following hearings on 6 and 24 September.
The mother, the first-named respondent, contested the application. The father consented. The judgment says the court heard evidence from two social workers, a psychologist, an access worker, the mother and the guardian ad litem (GAL), and received a booklet of documents. It excluded letters and reports listed at items 11 to 14 of that booklet. All parties and the GAL attended and were legally represented.
The court found that the mother had been assessed as having a mild to moderate learning disability and a global memory deficit, which significantly affected her capacity to provide adequate and safe parenting. It found that after Child 1’s birth she could not meet his basic needs, and that he needed a high level of care for feeding, weight gain and medical follow-up that she was not able to provide.
The judgment also records findings about the mother’s limited understanding of supervision and safety for a young baby, her lack of significant progress in caring for Child 1 during access despite extensive support, and her limited insight into the potential effects of aggressive and violent behaviour. The court said the family had received social work involvement over a number of years and concluded that the mother was unlikely to provide a safe and stable environment for Child 1 in future.
The court accepted that the mother might be motivated to care for Child 1 but found she lacked the capacity to do so. It said appropriate supports had been offered and no further reasonable support had a realistic chance of improving her capacity enough for her to care for him. The GAL supported the application. The court considered the order proportionate and said the child’s best interests and welfare required care and protection unlikely to be available without it. It also said the mother could have an important place in the child’s life with identified support and the support of her daughter.
The order runs until Child 1’s 18th birthday; the date is redacted in the source. An after-care review was directed for a redacted date or the next business day. The court also directed the applicant and the GAL, or an alternative GAL, to re-enter the case if specified social work allocation, fostering-link, review-timing or placement-change conditions arose. Access is to be in accordance with section 37 of the Act. The GAL was discharged, with an order for costs.