Family cases 'the poor relation' of justice system
Family law cases are the "the poor relation" in the justice system with an urgent need for more district court judges.
The latest batch of reports from the Child Care Law Reporting Project (CCLRP) has also highlighted a lack of joined-up services for vulnerable parents and a shortage of mental health supports for adolescents.
The CCLRP publishes 47 reports today , detailing cases which include:
- Two toddlers had to be the subject of court orders for fear they would be exposed to sexual abuse, in part because their mother was seeing a man on the sex offender's register
- A highly at-risk teenage girl was admitted to successive secure care placements after being sexually exploited
- One legal representative saying of a teenager, "he had never come across anyone as dangerous"
- Twins had to be put in separate placements
Other issues to emerge included the debilitating role of drug addiction among parents and the difficulties in dealing with young people with challenging behaviours and sometimes severe mental health issues.
Six of the reports are from the High Court and one is from the Court of Appeal, while the remainder were heard in the District Court in most areas of the country.
CCLRP director, Dr Carol Coulter, said some issues kept emerging, such as addiction in families.
"There is the lack of joined-up services for vulnerable parents because a lot of the services they need to enable them to parent safely are with other agencies, mostly the HSE," she said.
"Tusla can't access the services, the courts can't order the HSE to do anything because Tusla are bringing the application."
She said similar issues affected access to child and adolescent mental health services, while another issue was early intervention and whether that would help problems worsening in some families, leading to a crisis and a more pronounced state care intervention.
Some reports refer to the manner in which family law cases are heard, crammed into lengthy district court lists.
The lack of district court judges was highlighted when a case in which an infant who had presented with several serious injuries heard among 68 criminal matters and 71 family matters heard on the same day in a rural town.
“The reality is that the State needs more district court judges” said the judge in the case.
Dr Coulter said: "Family law is being treated as the poor relation in the justice system."
The report also outlines how Tusla's National Special Care Committee was found by the High Court not to have made their decision not to consider an application for special care for a child described as highly dangerous in accordance with the law.
A judicial review had been taken by the mother of a teenage boy, on an emergency basis when the National Special Care Committee declined to make a determination that the boy needed an application made for special care, on the basis that he did not meet the criteria. He had already spent one year in secure care and had a history of violent and criminal behaviour.
He was already facing charges in the criminal justice system for robbery and assaults, including knife assaults and the boy’s guardian ad litem, who supported the judicial review of the decision not to consider him for secure care, said “he had never come across anyone as dangerous.”
Case studies
In one case a child told gardai that a boy's mother had burnt his hands one night with something "you can put in the oven" and that "it made me sad".
The boy became "upset and hysterical" when discussing his family and the garda interviewer said he thought the child's version of events "came across as genuine".
The child was one of four who were the subject of an interim care order after a court heard evidence of physical abuse and sexualised behaviour by the children, who had been admitted to foster care under an emergency care order.
The court had previously granted an emergency care order and an interim care order where two of the children were found to have suspected non-accidental burn injuries.
The parents were from a non-European country but had lived in Ireland for more than a decade.
A doctor said the children had come into contact with a hot object for a period of time and both children had come into contact with the same object. The parents denied they had burnt the children.
An older child had alleged that the father had punched him in the nose while the three-year-old had displayed sexualised behaviour with the foster father.
According to the report: "The child was observed sitting up and down on a teddy bear and putting a rabbit in her private parts and saying, “daddy’s monster”."
It was described by a social worker as "very unusual" and led the child's mother to query the foster placement in court.
Brexit was raised as an issue in a case where a child in care in the UK under an Irish care order but said he did not wish to return to Ireland.
The boy had been in a previous placement, but when that broke down had been living in a caravan for a time. "The teenager was adamant that the UK was now his home as he had been living there since he was a young boy and did not want to return to Ireland. He had been with his foster parents for about three years after residing initially in a children’s home in the UK, which catered specifically for children with attachment disorders.
However, his placement broke down and a new placement was needed. The child was moved to a residential placement, but this was not suitable, and another placement was needed.
"The court heard that the boy, who under no circumstances wanted to return to Ireland, had previously told the social worker that he would kill himself if he was returned." However, the teenager had some family access in Ireland over the Christmas period and for the first time moving back to Ireland was “a real option”.
His guardian ad litem was very concerned about the child’s legal status. The court heard that although it would be possible to find another placement in UK, it was uncertain whether the Brussels II A regulations would still apply after Brexit. The judge pointed out that the responsibility of the Irish court would continue until the child turned 18.
The lack of district court judges was highlighted when a case in which an infant who had presented with several serious injuries heard among 68 criminal matters and 71 family matters heard on the same day in a rural town.
“The reality is that the State needs more district court judges” said the judge adding that new legislation to cope with the workload of the district courts in Ireland should be enacted. Comparing the number of district court judges in the 1940s and in 2019, the judge said: “Do your maths and figure out the workload. That is the reality.”
In the case involving the infant there were suspicions that the parents had caused the injuries and an interim care order was extended.
In another case, the court granted an extension of an interim care order for a young child who had been in care since birth. The father was dead and the mother had a drug addiction. The CFA, who was seeking a care order, was reminded that the next few months the district court was under huge pressure with workload.
The Child and Family Agency decided to separate twins after their placements had broken down because it believed there was no prospect of keeping them together.
The twins were among five children in a family who were all the subject of care orders.
The twins had a very high level of need and Tusla had elected to separate them. The solicitor for the CFA said that the male twin was getting on well in his placement but "the situation was worse regarding the female twin".
She had been placed with an experienced foster carer with relevant professional experience but the placement failed. She was now in an emergency placement with somebody she knew and Tusla said despite her young age, such is her level of dysfunction that serious consideration was being given to placing her in a specialist residential treatment unit.
The solicitor for Tusla said placing the twins together would challenge the placement to such an extent that it would fail for both.
A mother consented to an interim care order and a supervision order in respect of her two toddlers, following concerns that the toddlers might be exposed to sexual abuse.
A social worker said the mother had displayed concerning behaviour since her most recent baby was born and had left him in the care of her parents while she had left with two men who social services were concerned about. The mother was in a relationship with a man who was on the sex offenders’ register and despite having given a commitment in the past not to expose her older toddler to him, she had done so.
The social worker stated that there were concerns also about the toddler being exposed to his father.
An extension of an interim care order was granted in the Dublin District Court for a boy whose father was incarcerated outside of the jurisdiction and whose mother was living in a tent.
The child had been born in Ireland to an Irish mother and to a father who had been from outside the jurisdiction but living in Ireland at the time. The child’s mother, who had significant mental health issues, was living in a tent in the suburbs of Dublin and did not want access to her child or to be a party to the proceedings.
In another case an interim care order was extended in respect of two children whose birth mother was dead and whose father, who was from another European country, was in custody for a very serious offence.
A highly at-risk teenage girl was admitted to successive secure care placements after being sexually exploited as well as being exploited as a drug trafficker in drug-related crime.
At the time she had been under a care order and living in a residential centre where she was known to be using drugs, absconding and not attending school. The girl appeared to be unaware of the "extraordinary risks" surrounding her.
Counsel for the CFA told the court that there was “imminent risk of harm and even death” the case was so serious and that A was highly at risk of sexual exploitation. The ACTS (assessment consultation and therapy service) service was currently hoping to engage her with a psychologist and complete an assessment of her functioning.
A three-week-old baby was returned to the UK after a judge ruled its mother had only arrived in Ireland while eight-and-a-half weeks pregnant to avoid the child being taken into care.
The woman was known to social services in the UK and had three older children, who had all been taken into care. When enquiries were made by the Irish Social Work Department, it transpired that a pre-birth assessment had taken place in the UK and they decided to take the child into care upon birth.
Tusla made an application for an Interim Care Order based on the evidence of the UK social worker which was given by way of CCTV link.
"The social worker gave evidence that the mother could not put her children’s needs before that of her husband, who is the father of two of her older children," the report said.
A molestation order was in place together with a restraining order and both of these orders were in place when this baby was conceived.
The CFA’s National Special Care Committee did not made their decision not to consider an application for special care for a child described as highly dangerous in accordance with the law, the High Court ruled. Senior counsel for the CFA responded that the CFA would give an undertaking that the National Special Care Committee would consider the matter in accordance with the law and the matter would therefore be referred back to the Committee for further consideration.
This followed a judicial review taken by the mother of a teenage boy, A. She brought the judicial review on an emergency basis when the National Special Care Committee declined to make a determination that the boy needed an application made for special care, on the basis that he did not meet the criteria for secure care. He was a child who had already spent one year in secure care.
The boy had a history of violent and criminal behaviour, and was already facing charges in the criminal justice system for robbery and assaults, including knife assaults. The boy’s guardian ad litem, who supported the judicial review of the decision not to consider him for secure care, said “he had never come across anyone as dangerous.”
The CFA made a section 47 application for a child of Catholic parents, who was in foster care, to attend a Church of Ireland primary school in a rural town. The court heard the parents of the young child were not consenting to her attending the local Church of Ireland primary school on religious grounds. Both parents were present and legally represented. The father was from another EU country. There were two witnesses, a social worker and a GAL.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
