The District Court directed the Health Service Executive (HSE) to “forthwith consider long-term private foster placement” for an 11-year-old boy in its care, after finding that excluding such placements was not in his best interests. The court adjourned the care-order review to 24 February 2012 and required the HSE to report on its progress in securing a foster placement, including through private agencies.
The boy had been in HSE care since late 2009, first under emergency and interim care orders and then under a care order made in late 2010. He remained in the same residential placement throughout. The court said there was no issue about the care he received there, but found that all professionals involved considered the placement unsuitable and long-term foster care to be in his best interests.
The HSE had made substantial efforts to find a foster placement, without success. At a review on 12 January 2012, it said it would consider only an HSE foster placement because it would not provide long-term funding for a private placement. The HSE cited the higher cost of private care. It estimated an HSE placement at about €350 a week and said private care would cost three to four times as much. The court accepted that private placement substantially exceeded the cost of an HSE placement, while noting that the €350 figure did not include certain HSE services.
The court considered the child’s age urgent: it said a foster placement should be secured within the next few months if there was to be a realistic opportunity for him to settle in long-term foster care. The child was then under 12. Although placement near his home community and continued access to his school had been relevant, the court accepted the guardian ad litem’s view that securing a foster placement had become more important than location, subject to reconsideration if a specific placement outside Town 1 were identified.
In deciding whether to intervene under section 47 of the Child Care Act 1991, the court rejected the HSE’s submission that its powers were confined to cases involving constitutional rights. It held that a question affecting a child’s welfare could engage section 47, while recognising that the court’s power was not unlimited and had to be exercised in the context of the Act.
The direction did not order the HSE to place the child with a particular carer or require it to select a private placement. It required the HSE to consider long-term private foster care and report on placement progress at the next review.