The District Court granted care orders for three children until they reach adulthood, finding they required care and protection they were unlikely to receive without court intervention.
The Child and Family Agency applied under section 18 of the Child Care Act 1991. The four-day hearing concluded with the orders on 3 October 2014. The judge’s written reasons, dated 12 November 2014, said the orders would run until each child reached the age of majority. The judgment gave separate expiry dates: December 2014 for Child A, April 2018 for Child B and April 2019 for Child C.
The parents opposed the application and attended the hearing without legal representation. The judgment said they did not call evidence to contradict the Agency’s evidence. The judge heard from Gardaí, social workers, education and welfare officers, a clinical psychologist, medical witnesses and the court-appointed guardian ad litem. The children’s statements were admitted as evidence after the judge determined it was not in their welfare interests to give evidence directly or by video link or intermediary.
The court found that the children had experienced significant educational and health neglect, significant neglect of their social development, and physical abuse while in their mother’s care. The judge found reasonable cause to believe the neglect and abuse resulted from the mother’s unaddressed and untreated mental health problems and alcohol abuse. The court also found that neither parent had shown insight into or ability to meet the children’s needs, that both had refused support services, and that the father had failed to act protectively while the children were in their mother’s care.
The guardian told the court that the children wished to remain in the Agency’s care, have no contact with their mother and continue contact with their father, which had recently resumed. The judge directed the Agency to facilitate reasonable access between the children and their parents, taking account of the guardian’s recommendations and the children’s wishes. The judgment does not set a fixed contact schedule.
Under section 47 directions, the case must return to court in specified circumstances, including a change in foster placement or a failure to carry out statutory care reviews. The Agency was also directed to begin aftercare planning for Children B and C and bring the matter back to court on the stated dates. The judge gave the guardian liberty to refer concerns about agencies’ earlier responses to the Ombudsman for Children for investigation.