Care order application dismissed as parents consented; court issues detailed support and review directions.

[2014] IEDC 10

AN CHUIRT DUICHE THE DISTRICT COURT

CHILD AND FAMILY AGENCY (CFA)

APPLICANT

AND

IO

FIRST NAMED RESPONDENT

AND

BO

SECOND NAMED RESPONDENT

CHILD CARE ACT 1991 – SECTION 18 (1)

IN THE MATTER OF A, B, C AND D CHILDREN

25 March 2014

1. This is an application for a care order under section 18(1) (b) and (c) of the Child Care Act 1991 (herein after referred to as ‘the

1991 Act’) in respect of four children aged 9 years, 8 years, 5 years, and 4 years respectively.

2. The children’s mother is legally represented in the proceedings. She consents to the making of the care order and accepts that the

threshold criterion for the making of care orders were met by the Child and Family Agency (CFA) in the circumstances.

3. The children’s father is also legally represented in the proceedings but he did not appear in court; his legal representative did not

oppose the orders sought by the CFA.

4. The children’s separate interests in the proceedings were highlighted by their Guardian ad Litem (GAL).

5. All four children are currently in the care of the CFA pursuant to interim care orders made in early 2013 and extended by the Court

since that date to the date of hearing.

Background

6. Both mother and father emigrated to this country in or about 1996. The father is a very hard worker and takes pride in his

employment status and his work. The mother is a full time carer for the children. She is very isolated with limited social or family

supports and has a poor command of the English language. The marriage has been under pressure for some time and the mother

suspected that her husband had another partner and family other than hers.

7. The Health Service Executive (now replaced by the CFA) became involved with this family due to their concerns that the mother

was struggling to care for the children unsupported.

8. During 2010 the CFA had concerns regarding reports of domestic violence between the parents, the mother’s isolation and fragile

mental health, her care of the children and her unwillingness to engage with the CFA. In 2011 the CFA concerns focused on an injury

suffered by the youngest child where the nature of the injury (a spiral fracture of the distal left humerus) was not consistent with the

mechanism of injury reported by the mother.

9. Significant efforts were made to scaffold the children’s care within their family unit from August 2011 until the date of hearing.

Following a child protection case conference held in September 2011 a child protection plan was put in place involving private family

friends caring for the children supported by the Social Work Department to enable the mother to address her mental health issues.

This arrangement continued for a number of weeks and the children were then returned home. It was agreed that the father would

ensure that the mother had the benefit of a child-minder during the day and that he would care for the children at the weekend. The

CFA financed a parental capacity assessment by a psychologist namely Dr ABL. The psychologist suggested that a psychiatric

assessment was necessary. It took some time before the seriousness of the mother’s mental ill health was diagnosed.

10. Unfortunately, and for a number of interconnected reasons, the supports and interventions attempted by the CFA and the parents

did not suffice to ensure ‘good enough’ parenting for the children with their mother when the marital relationship disintegrated.

11. The CFA brought proceedings under section 19 of the 1991 Act in early 2013 seeking a supervision order in respect of the

children. These proceedings were adjourned to allow both mother and father to source legal advice and assistance regarding the

proceedings and the matters at issue. The CFA engaged in dialogue with both parents during that period so as to endeavour to agree

a satisfactory child protection plan until the matter came back to court one week later. Their goal was to put a cordon of care in

place which would address their concerns and allow the children to remain at home. However due to an impasse in that dialogue their

concerns escalated rather than abated and in early 2013 they sought an emergency care order under section 13 of the 1991 Act in

order to protect the children whom they believed to be at immediate and serious risk of harm.

12. It has now been diagnosed that the children’s mother suffers from a significant psychiatric illness which has impaired her capacity

to parent her children. This was conceded by her legal representatives to be a key factor in the case.

13. Both psychological and social work parental capacity assessments undertaken found that she does not have the capacity to

provide adequate and safe parenting for her children for a number of reasons. In addition to her diagnosis of schizophrenia in 2013,

the mother has limited personal resources. She has been assessed as functioning within the borderline or mild intellectual disability

range. She has very limited parenting knowledge and is socially isolated. She is also bereaved in the aftermath of her marriage

breakdown. She has only very basic fluency in the English language, she has not managed to make friends and has become socially

isolated despite being in Ireland for some time.

14. The children’s father does not suffer from any social, psychological or intellectual impairment. The parties no longer reside

together and he does not see his role as that of being a primary carer for the children. Dr ABL formed the professional opinion that his

presentation suggested an excessive degree of narcissism in his personality and an apparent deficit in terms of empathy and a

consequential lack of insight into the emotional needs of his children or the mental ill health and social isolation of his estranged wife.

Findings

15. I have heard the evidence from:

• CS, Social Worker;

• Dr ABL, Psychologist;

• C, Social Worker; and

• OR, Guardian ad Litem for the Children.

16. The three psychological reports of Dr ABL, psychologist together with the reports of Dr CR, locum consultant psychiatrist and Dr

CC, consultant paediatrician endocrinologist were admitted by the mother’s legal team without formal proof. The mother’s legal advisor

was clear however that while her client accepted that she suffers from mental ill health she was not familiar with the term

“schizophrenia” and did not fully understand its import for her or for the care of her children.

17. The GAL indicated that the children’s experience of harm in the care of their parents has affected them profoundly and they

require immediate and significant therapeutic interventions. All the children may require speech and language therapy, and two of

them urgently need an educational assessment. The GAL is also concerned that the care plans in respect of the older three children

be adequately populated with data as set out in paragraph 12 of her report to the Court.

18. The older two children’s wishes and feelings we outlined by the GAL and in the template forms (from CAFCASS) provided at pages

55-85 of the booklet of reports. I have also read the letters from the eldest child to the Court in mid 2013 and early 2014. The forms

and letters present the complexity of the issues presenting for the children including their anger and their perceptions of each of their

parents.

Decision

19. Having considered the evidence and after considering the submissions of all parties, I had reached a position where I had come to

conclusions on the issues of fact. I am satisfied on the evidence that the multiple and complex problems experienced by the mother

made her emotionally unavailable to the children resulting in them suffering both physical and emotional harm. I am also satisfied that

the father’s inability or unwillingness to provide a safe cordon of protective care for the children coupled with his inability to

empathise with their plight or that of their mother’s also exposes them to emotional harm.

20. I concluded that on the evidence adduced the CFA had established that each of the children’s health, development or welfare has

been avoidably impaired or neglected, and that it was also likely to be avoidably impaired or neglected into the future unless the Court

made an order under this section in respect of the children. It was therefore fair, to communicate the decision reached to the parties

as soon as possible and I did so in March 2014.

21. The consequential directions arising on the evidence and submissions however must now be delivered.

Section 37 Access

22. Having heard the evidence set out above and having reached the issues of fact enunciated above I direct that access should be

at the discretion of the CFA in accordance with section 37 of the 1991 Act, however, the frequency of access with the each of the

parents should now be reviewed following the make of this care order. The CFA should note in particular the necessity of the children

developing good cultural attitude towards their non-European heritage and customs and the needs of the children for good quality

sibling contact while in separate placements.

Section 47 Directions

A. I direct that the CFA provide the mother with all supports necessary, including an interpreter and advocate, to assist her in

meaningfully engaging in access with her children and in all interactions with the CFA in respect of her children.

B. I direct that the CFA are to undertake a review of the findings of the educational psychological assessment (in respect of A) which

took place in early 2014 and advocate for or put in place all supports identified as necessary in the educational welfare of the child.

C. I direct that the CFA are to provide A’s current school and any subsequent school which he/she may attend with a copy of the

educational psychological assessment, and a copy of the speech language assessment.

D. I direct that the CFA are to advocate for the funding and provision of an educational assessment in respect of C, such assessment

to be procured as a matter of priority.

E. I direct that the CFA are to procure an occupational therapist assessment in respect of C’s speech and language needs and then

identify the service most appropriate to provide such therapy and the commencement date for any such necessary therapeutic

service.

F. I direct that the CFA are to provide all of the children with all necessary therapeutic services to assist them in coming to terms

with their experience of harm while in the care of their parents, to assist A and C in coping with their anger towards their father, and

to understand their mother’s mental health condition so that they may be assisted to develop an appropriate and respectful

relationship with their mother in particular; in light of their expressed wishes and in light of the expressed attitudes, of A and C in

particular, to their mother.

G. I direct that the case be re-entered before the Court in May 2014 to clarify all reports and services for the children directed by

this order. The GAL is to remain in place until the outstanding issues in relation to the needs of the children, as directed above, have

been arranged for.

H. Under section 47 of the 1991 Act I direct that the case is to be re-entered before the Court by the CFA (on notice to the GAL) in

the event:

(i) The case becomes unallocated to social worker for a period of four weeks;

(ii) The case becomes unallocated to a fostering link worker for each of the children’s foster parents for a period of

six weeks;

(iii) The Agency (for any reason) fails to adhere to the statutory care planning regulations;

(iv) The children’s current foster placements are not matched as their long term placements; the children’s current

foster placements break down; or the CFA seek to change the children’s current foster placements.

I. The case is to be re-entered before the Court by the CFA to review the needs of these children in late 2015.

J. The case is to be re-entered before the Court by the CFA (on notice to the GAL) for the purposes of after care review on the

nearest court date to each of the children’s sixteenth birthday.

This re-entry is for the purpose of the Court and GAL for the children to review and approve the After Care Plan and provision for

each child at that time should they remain in the care of the CFA at that time.

K. The GAL is to be re-appointed six weeks before these dates.

L. If the GAL in this case is no longer available at that time then the CFA is to bring an application to the Court pursuant to section

23 of the 1991 Act for the purposes of having a GAL appointed.

M. I adjourn the issue of costs generally with liberty to re-enter.

District Court Judge

Judge Rosemary Horgan