The Circuit Court has ordered the Health Service Executive to implement a 2019 recommendation for psychology, occupational therapy and speech and language therapy for a child, with the deadline for providing the services still to be set.
In a judgment dated 8 November 2021, Judge Cormac Quinn found that the HSE had failed to implement the recommendation in full. The order under section 22 of the Disability Act 2005 directs the HSE to provide the services “in a realistic time frame”, but the judge said a date would be specified after hearing submissions from counsel.
The child, identified in the judgment as L O’B, was assessed in March 2019 and found to have autism spectrum disorder. The assessment identified speech and language therapy, psychology, occupational therapy and preschool support as required. The judgment says the child had received some speech and language sessions, but had not received the recommended psychology and occupational therapy services.
A disability complaints officer upheld a complaint about services not being provided and, on 4 September 2019, recommended that the service statement be amended and that intervention begin in a realistic timeframe, no later than January 2020. The judgment records that an amended statement later gave a June 2020 start date. Proceedings were brought in the Circuit Court, and an order was made by consent in February 2020 concerning the service statement. The enforcement motion was lodged in July 2021.
The HSE argued that the court’s enforcement role was narrow and that later service statements and the unavailability of a place at Beechpark meant an order should not be made on the historic recommendation. The applicant argued that later statements could not displace the complaints officer’s determination, and that the services remained necessary.
Judge Quinn held that the recommendation could still be enforced even if services could no longer be delivered at a particular location. He also found that later service statements did not nullify the complaints officer’s determination, noting that the HSE had not appealed or sought judicial review. The judge said the child’s mother agreeing to services outside Beechpark did not arise for consideration on the affidavit evidence.
The judgment states that the services remained required and had not been provided. It does not specify the final compliance date; the court said that would follow further submissions.