Dublin District Court granted a five-year care order for two young brothers, with a review after one year, in a case involving long-standing neglect, homelessness, and the mother’s significant personal difficulties. The court praised the mother’s insight in consenting to the order and highlighted the boys’ remarkable progress in foster care.
The CFA applied for a full care order under section 18(1)(b) and (c) of the Child Care Act, arguing that the children required care they were unlikely to receive without an order. The boys, Child A and Child B, were living in a long-term foster placement in a rural area. The mother was in homeless accommodation.
The CFA solicitor told the court the family had been known to the social work department since the previous year and that around twenty referrals had been received. Basic care needs had not been met, there had been concerns about hygiene, lack of food, and lack of supervision. A three-month residential assessment had been undertaken. The mother deeply loved her sons and the boys were very attached to her, but she had substantial problems and was unable to provide the required level of care.
The social worker said access between the mother and the children was extremely positive when it took place, but there had been a number of missed visits since the boys moved to the rural area. The mother usually had a reason for missing visits, such as difficulty with transport, but the missed contacts left the boys dysregulated. The social worker said the mother was not in a position to meet her own needs, and had significant difficulties caring for herself, let alone the children.
The agency’s position was that the mother needed to work through her own trauma and loss, including the tragic death of another child while in her care, and to address her mental health. Given the limited progress during the period of interim care, the CFA sought a five-year care order, with a review after one year to allow the boys to continue their positive trajectory and the mother to continue her own work.
The mother was legally represented. Her solicitor said there had been some difficulties in arranging consultations, but the mother generally engaged well and wanted to attend court. When the case was first called, her solicitor asked that it be left stand for a short time. The judge asked whether there were instructions in relation to the proposed five-year order and the one-year review; counsel said he had only a general idea of her feelings.
The judge allowed the matter to stand to give time to contact the mother. When the case resumed, the CFA solicitor told the court that the mother had spoken to her counsel and indicated consent to the application. The mother’s solicitor said she was on a bus and might not arrive for several hours, but had instructed him that she consented on a without-prejudice basis to the five-year order with a review after one year. He described her as a doting mother with significant challenges who needed the CFA’s support to improve her parenting.
The judge said that as the application was now on consent, the court would proceed to hear the evidence.
The social worker gave evidence confirming the contents of her report and recommending a five-year care order. She outlined the neglect concerns and the issues around the boys’ basic and emotional needs, as well as the unsuitability of the homeless accommodation in which they had been living with their mother.
She explained that play therapy had been recommended, and that both boys had required speech and language therapy because their environment had not supported their development. One boy had completed a block of twelve sessions; the other had already completed his programme.
The social worker told the court the foster placement was going “very well” and was extremely well matched to the boys, who could remain there as long as necessary. The CFA hoped to support the mother by helping her address her own trauma and develop the skills to care for the children in the future. She said the agency had encouraged the mother to engage with mental health supports through her GP and with other services, though she had not fully followed through.
In cross-examination, the mother’s solicitor put it to the social worker that access arrangements had improved and that the agency now provided overnight stays and travel supports to help the mother visit the boys in the rural placement. The social worker agreed and confirmed there had been positive developments and that the CFA would continue to provide these supports and to support the mother’s housing difficulties, including by liaising with the local authority. She accepted that the mother had ongoing depression and struggled to get out of bed, and said she had advised her to seek further support from her GP. She confirmed that the CFA would continue to provide advocacy for the mother.
The GAL gave evidence confirming her report. She said both boys were thriving. They were living in a small community where “everyone loves them”, and the difference between the children she had first met the previous year and the boys now was striking. Their speech and language skills had improved significantly, and they had formed a close bond with their foster carers. She said concerns about one boy’s development now appeared to have been environmental rather than intrinsic.
The GAL said she supported the CFA’s application for a five-year care order with a one-year review. She emphasised that access should continue under close review and that the agency was actively supporting the mother’s involvement. She said that if sufficient progress had not been made by the one-year review, she would recommend that clear decisions be made to give the children certainty. She also said that if, on the other hand, the mother made very significant progress in her parenting skills, any earlier review would have to consider the children’s situation as a whole.
In cross-examination, she agreed with the mother’s solicitor that the mother was a “doting and adoring” parent and that her decision to consent to the care order reflected a high level of insight. She said the mother consistently put the boys’ needs first and accepted decisions that were in their best interests.
The judge said he had read the detailed social work report, the booklet of documents, the parenting capacity assessment and the GAL’s report and recommendations. He noted that the father had not participated in the proceedings and had little to no involvement in the children’s lives.
He said it was clear that the mother loved her children dearly and had made a very difficult decision in recognising that she could not care for them safely at present. The judge commended the mother for the insight she had shown, particularly in the context of her trauma and mental health difficulties.
The judge highlighted the clear progress the boys had made in foster care, and praised the foster carers and the good relationship between them and the mother. He said it was important that support for the mother continued, through the social work department and other services, to help her heal and develop her parenting skills over the next twelve months.
The judge was satisfied that the threshold under section 18(1)(b) and (c) was met and granted a care order for five years, with a review after one year. The review would focus on how the mother was progressing in addressing her own needs and in developing her parenting capacity, as well as on the boys’ ongoing welfare.
Under section 47, he directed that the CFA must re-enter the case if the children were without an allocated social worker; if there were any change of placement; if child in care reviews did not take place; if the children were absent from school for more than a number of weeks; or if the father sought to engage with them. He commended the agency and all professionals involved for working together in the boys’ best interests.
The judge directed that the GAL remain involved until a date in early 2026 and that there should be an automatic re-appointment a number of weeks before the care order was due for review, so that the children’s situation could be fully assessed at that time.