The District Court ordered the admission and detention of a 16-year-old child in an approved mental health unit for assessment after finding reasonable cause to believe she was suffering from a mental disorder. The order was made under section 25 of the Mental Health Act 2001, where no prior examination by a consultant child psychiatrist had taken place.
The Health Service Executive (HSE) applied for the order. The court heard evidence from a locum consultant child and adolescent psychiatrist, a psychiatry senior house officer, the child’s mother and an ACTS psychotherapist. The doctors said the child had a history of low mood, anxiety, suicidal thoughts, overdoses and self-harm, and was displaying symptoms suggestive of psychosis. They considered admission necessary to assess her current mental state and risk, identify an appropriate treatment plan, and likely to benefit her condition.
The mother and psychotherapist described recent self-harm and suicidal statements, worsening behaviour and the child’s refusal to engage with mental health services or attend a voluntary assessment. Those accounts were evidence heard by the court; the judgment records no formal diagnosis before the application. The child was not present. The judge decided it was not in her interests to attend at that time.
The court found reasonable cause to believe the child met the mental disorder threshold under section 3(1)(a) and (b), and said an assessment by a consultant child psychiatrist who was not related to her was necessary and proportionate. It directed the HSE to arrange the examination and provide a report within 21 days, or earlier if practicable. The child was to be admitted and detained in an approved unit for that purpose. The court also authorised assisted admission under section 13 if clinically necessary and appropriate.
The judge appointed a Guardian Ad Litem, who may apply to discharge or vary the order and seek further directions. The court directed a second opinion by another consultant child psychiatrist, including an examination of the child, an interview with the psychiatrist responsible for her care and a review of her records. That written report was due within 14 days, with a copy to the Guardian Ad Litem or the child’s legal representative. The HSE was directed to give the mother access to the child in hospital and file a report, and a care plan if appropriate, after the assessment.
The judgment is dated 27 April 2018. It states that the hearing took place in camera and warns that identifying the child through publication may constitute contempt of court.