They also included the case of a pregnant girl who had been detained under the Mental Health Act following evidence from a consultant psychiatrist that she had a mental health disorder and was at risk of self-harm and suicide as a result of her pregnancy.
She had sought a termination of the pregnancy, but the psychiatrist said her condition could be managed by treatment and the termination of the pregnancy was not the solution for all the child’s problems at that stage.
The judge who granted the order detaining her also appointed a guardian ad litem (GAL) for the child and the GAL then applied to the District Court for a discharge of the order. The GAL visited the young girl on several occasions and reported to the judge that she did not wish to be detained and was extremely upset.
Although the case did not concern any application under the Child Care Act 1991, the case was heard in the District Court that normally hears child care cases.
Depression
Another consultant psychiatrist was employed by the GAL to assess the young girl and determine whether or not she had a mental disorder in accordance with the Mental Health Act.
That consultant psychiatrist was of the opinion that the young girl presented as being depressed, however, there was no evidence of a psychological disorder and she was dealing with her depression well.
This consultant psychiatrist was of the opinion that the young girl was not suicidal and was not in immediate danger of committing suicide.
The consultant psychiatrist concluded that as the young girl did not have a mental illness she could not be detained under the Mental Heath Act. The consultant psychiatrist also reported that the young girl had very strong views as to why she wanted a termination of her pregnancy.
Agitated
The court also heard evidence from the young girl’s treating adolescent psychiatrist who had last seen the young girl the day before the application. He was of the opinion that while the young girl remained agitated and angry, she did not suffer from an acute mental health disorder that warranted her detention under the Mental Health Act 2001.
He said that there had been an initial concern of self-harm and that the girl was very distressed to find out about the pregnancy.
The GAL pointed out that there was no conflict regarding the evidence from the two consultant psychiatrists and therefore the Order should be discharged immediately. In the light of all the evidence the judge discharged the order.
Among the other cases was a report of a Circuit Court appeal of an earlier District Court Care Order for five children following allegations of serious neglect and sexual abuse by their parents. The appeal lasted 47 days, and the District Court hearing had taken almost 70 days.
The appeal was unsuccessful, and the children remain in care. This case was one of a number where the proceedings were very protracted and where there were days of legal argument concerning the admissibility of hearsay evidence from children and the reliability of evidence from specialist sex abuse units.
Another case concerned a Care Order for a girl who had made allegations of sexual abuse against multiple perpetrators in circumstances involving her mother over a number of years. She had also made allegations of being drugged before the abuse took place.
There were further allegations of being asked many times by her mother to pose naked while photos were taken of her and that subsequently these photos were shown to the men before they abused her. The child also made allegations of physical abuse, emotional abuse and neglect.
Abuse
This case revealed some of the difficulties in the investigation of child sexual abuse and in the interplay of child protection proceedings with Garda investigations.
In this case the child was interviewed 11 times in all by both a specialist child sex abuse clinic and a specialist Garda interviewer.
A forensic clinic psychologist from another jurisdiction described parts of the Garda child specialist interview process of a young girl as “abusive” and “relentless”.
The quality of the interviewer’s training was questioned as well as the lack of ongoing training. When told there would be no prosecutions of the perpetrators of the abuse the forensic psychologist said: “I am not surprised.”
The reports of the High Court cases where children are detained for therapy and their own protection reveal the difficulty in sometimes finding appropriate “step-down” placements for children who no longer need to be detained, but are not stable enough to return home or go to foster care.
Such children also often wait for months for appropriate psychiatric assessment and help, and the High Court has intervened on a number of occasions to insist that they receive such services.
However, the reports also give examples of good practice by the Child and Family Agency, where social workers go to great lengths to protect vulnerable children.
An unaccompanied minor had arrived in the State saying she was seeking asylum. Her father was deceased and there had been no contact with her mother.
Guardian
Earlier the court had extended an Interim Care Order when the social worker informed the court that the child had no parent or guardian in the State.
He told the court that the social work department had not undertaken family tracing as they believed this could pose a risk to the child’s family.
At this hearing the court ruled that, in the circumstances of the case, it was not necessary to attempt to give notice to the child’s parents of the intention to seek a Care Order. The CFA had found a placement which was closer to adoption than fostering.
The foster carer wanted a long term placement and the child was really looking forward to becoming part of a family.
The child had also visited the town and the school and had had an overnight stay with the intended foster carer, which was very positive, the social worker said. The GAL praised the efforts made by the social worker on the child’s behalf.
This is the second year in which the CCLRP is publishing reports twice-yearly, compared with quarterly for the first three years. The project is now focusing in detail on some lengthy and complex cases.
Research
As well on reporting them, the CCLRP is conducting qualitative research into the reasons for some cases becoming so protracted. A report on the result of this research will be published at the end of the year.
All the reports are published on the CCLRP website, www.childlawproject.ie.