The High Court authorised the Adoption Authority of Ireland to make an adoption order for A. M. in favour of his foster carers, and dispensed with the consent of his parents. The decision under section 54(2) of the Adoption Act 2010 followed a hearing on 26 April 2018. It authorises the Authority to make the order; the judgment does not say that the Authority has since made one.
The court had to address major gaps in the evidence, including the absence of a birth certificate, proof of the asserted birth mother’s identity, a death certificate for the presumed birth father, and corroboration of the mother’s account. Enquiries in Ireland, England and Romania produced no independent records of the child’s birth or parents.
The child’s date of birth was uncertain. His mother gave different dates in later contacts with social workers and eventually said she was unsure. The court found that the only written record was the date she supplied in her April 2002 refugee-status application: 31 May 2000. She signed that application after being given an opportunity to correct it. Weighing that contemporaneous record against her later accounts, the judge found on the balance of probabilities that 31 May 2000 was the likely date of birth. The court said it had to resolve whether he was under 18 on imperfect evidence.
The judgment says the child entered foster care after an emergency care order in 2003 and had lived with the applicants since he was four. His last contact with his mother was in August 2003. She later objected to adoption, including in discussions with Adoption Services, but no further contact with the child followed. The judgment describes his significant physical and developmental needs and says he was unaware that he was in foster care and did not understand his heritage or background.
An assessor appointed by the Adoption Authority, in a role analogous to a guardian ad litem, told the court that the child strongly identified with the prospective adoptive parents and considered adoption to be in his best interests. The assessor recommended addressing his heritage and identity when he was more mature and less emotionally vulnerable.
The judge concluded that the mother had failed in her parental duties since the child entered care, that there was no reasonable prospect she could care for him without detriment to his welfare, and that adoption was in his best interests. The court said the Authority had complied with the other statutory requirements and granted the two section 54(2) orders.