Parents report ‘soft coercion’ from Tusla

Some parents whose children are placed in care voluntarily experience “soft coercion” where they are told that if they refuse to sign a voluntary care agreement, a court order will be obtained.

That is according to the preliminary findings of the Voluntary Care in Ireland Study by Kenneth Burns, Conor O’Mahony, and Rebekah Brennan of the School of Applied Social Studies and School of Law at UCC.

A voluntary care arrangement is where a child enters foster care by agreement between Tusla and the parent instead of by court order.

The findings were presented at the National Child Protection and Welfare Social Work Conference in Cork and pointed to a range of weaknesses for both and parents and children in the Irish voluntary care system.

It found that voluntary care arrangements have fewer safeguards to protect the rights of children and parents than care orders made by courts.

With regard to parents, the study found that while parents involved in court proceedings will always have the benefit of legal advice (unless they refuse it), parents rarely receive legal advice before entering into voluntary care arrangements.

“Moreover, many parents who find themselves in this situation are struggling with mental health issues, addiction issues, or cognitive impairments, and may not be well-placed to fully understand the consequences of a voluntary care arrangement [such as the extent of the decision-making powers that remain with the parent],” said the report’s authors.

“Our study has disclosed evidence that some parents may experience ‘soft coercion’, whereby they are told that if they refuse to sign a voluntary care agreement, a court order will be obtained instead.

“The absence of legal advice, coupled in many cases with difficulties in understanding, leave parents unable to question or challenge this assertion or realise that a court order might not necessarily be granted.”

There is “limited scope for child participation in voluntary care arrangements” according to the study.

It said: “Tusla has a general obligation to ascertain and give due weight to the views of children, but there is no mechanism prescribed for how this should happen in voluntary care arrangements, unlike in court proceedings, where a guardian ad litem can be appointed to report on the child’s views and best interests.

“Our study suggests that the decision as to whether a child should enter voluntary care is made entirely between Tusla and the parents, with little meaningful child participation at that point of the process.”

It calls for the replacement of Section 4 of the Child Care Act 1991, which regulates voluntary care arrangements at present, with “a more detailed provision that includes more specific safeguards for the rights of children and parents”.

“Provision should be made to ensure that parents give free and informed consent including, but not limited to, the availability of legal advice. Independent oversight of voluntary care arrangements would benefit the children and the parents.

“Consideration should be given to placing a time limit on how long a voluntary agreement can remain valid before either being renewed, reviewed or transitioning to a court-based care order.”