Judge hits out at Tusla for handling of siblings on their sixth social worker

Tusla, the Child and Family Agency, has been criticised by the president of the district court and a child protection professional for its handling of a case involving two siblings who are now on their sixth social worker.

The agency yesterday applied for the extension of an interim care order in respect of the siblings, who have been in care for a number of years.

A Tusla social worker told the court she had only just been assigned the case after the previous social worker left his position. She said while she had reviewed the case, she has not met the mother and only met the father yesterday in court.

Judge Rosemary Horgan, the president of the district court, said she was “extremely surprised” there was not a measured transfer to the new social worker.

“Due respect is owed to the parents, due respect is owed to the children, and due respect is owed to the foster carers,” she said.

“It is essential that there is good interaction between the social work team and both parents.”

The court heard that one of the siblings had only recently been referred to a speech and language therapist, even though the issue had been identified for some time. Judge Horgan called the situation “unacceptable”.

The court-appointed guardian for the siblings, who represents their interests during court proceedings, also expressed concern over Tusla’s handling of the handover between the old and new social workers.

The guardian said she does not think the siblings understand the change in social worker, adding that this is the sixth social worker the children have been allocated since they went into care.

The guardian also criticised Tusla for not having any access worker available for meetings between the parents and the children.

She said the availability of an access worker is “still problematic”, adding that it was her understanding that there has not been an access worker allocated because none are available.

The guardian said one of the siblings presents as quite a nervous, worried child, and would have negative feelings about access with the father. This child was exposed to a number of childcare protection issues at an early age, she said.

The court heard that the father, who was in court, consented to an extension of the care order.

The mother was not present in court but had indicated that she consented to the extension of the care order.

Judge Horgan extended the care order for two months.