The Dublin Metropolitan District court made a two-year care order for Child A, then four, after finding that her health, development and welfare were likely to be avoidably impaired or neglected if she returned to her parents’ care at that time. The judge declined the Child and Family Agency’s request for an order lasting until she turned 18, finding that duration had not been shown to be necessary or proportionate.
The Child and Family Agency sought a full care order under section 18 of the Child Care Act 1991. Child A’s mother accepted that the legal threshold for an order was met but argued that a shorter term would give her an opportunity to develop parenting skills and work towards reunification. The father also supported a shorter order. The guardian ad litem supported the Agency’s request for an order until age 18.
Child A had lived with her maternal grandmother since birth and remained in her care under interim care orders from September 2012. A 2013 psychological assessment found that her mother did not then have the skills needed to provide adequate parenting, though she might develop them with sufficient support, supervision and direction. The judge also accepted concerns that the mother’s needs and relationship with the father had at times taken priority over Child A’s safety and welfare.
A 12-month plan launched in July 2013 aimed to build the mother’s parenting capacity, with the grandmother continuing as Child A’s primary carer. The plan was ended in February 2014 after professionals found insufficient progress. The parents then disengaged from social workers and support services. The mother later completed an online parenting course and obtained a place on a support programme, but had not engaged with a review of her parenting capacity. The father had stopped contact with Child A and failed to attend a parenting programme, though he attended the second day of the hearing and arranged to meet a social worker.
The judge said the evidence established that Child A needed care and protection that she was unlikely to receive without an order. However, she considered the parents’ youth, the mother’s communication and learning needs, her recent efforts and both parents’ willingness to pursue contact. The judge said the parents might now be able to work with a tailored plan towards reunification. Child A was settled with her grandmother, had a loving relationship with her mother, and wanted more contact with her father.
The Agency was directed to prepare a two-year plan and update the court within six weeks. The order also requires the Agency to provide appropriate therapeutic and parenting supports, speech and language therapy for the mother, an advocate to assist her, and family mediation. The court ordered a general review in six months and said the care order could be extended if grounds continued to exist and progress was lacking. The guardian ad litem was to remain involved until that review.