The District Court ordered that a child remain in the care of the Child and Family Agency until age 18 after finding, on the balance of probabilities, that she had suffered physical abuse, neglect, emotional abuse and sexual abuse while in her mother’s care.
The full care order was made under section 18(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the Child Care Act 1991. The court said the child’s welfare required the order and that the risk of renewed abuse would be highly likely if she returned to her mother’s care. The mother was the only named respondent. The judgment says the father was not named on the child’s birth certificate and had no involvement in her life.
The Child and Family Agency had alleged that the mother enabled sexual abuse by several men, including by knowingly or recklessly facilitating it. The mother denied harming the child and said she was dealing with difficulties with alcohol. The court rejected her explanations and found that she had knowingly involved the child in sexual abuse. It also found that the mother lacked parenting capacity and insight into the effect on the child.
The hearing began in 2016 and lasted 14 full days, with evidence from 14 witnesses. The judge admitted and gave substantial weight to the child’s hearsay statements, including recorded interviews and accounts to carers and professionals. The judgment says the mother and the child’s Guardian ad Litem had access to the interview recordings and transcripts, and that the evidence was tested in cross-examination. An independent forensic psychologist’s report found little cause for concern about the veracity of the child’s evidence.
The court recounted earlier child-protection concerns, including referrals about the mother’s drinking between 2007 and 2009. In winter 2012, a neighbour reported that the child was distressed and had allegedly been left alone at home for three days. Social workers and gardaí who visited found the mother intoxicated and the home in an appalling condition. An emergency care order was granted, followed by interim care arrangements.
The order includes directions for access with the mother to proceed at the child’s pace and in line with her welfare, and for the Agency to provide necessary therapeutic services and life-story work. The Guardian ad Litem is to be reappointed if specified placement or care-review conditions arise, including a placement change or gaps in social-work support. The judge also proposed a court listing for after-care planning on the child’s 17th birthday.
The judgment records a prohibition on publishing or broadcasting evidence from the proceedings, subject to stated exceptions and court permission. It also says reports by the Child Law Reporting Project cannot be republished by media organisations without an application to the District Court in Dublin on notice to the Agency.