A district court judge in a rural town granted a care order until the age of 18 for a sixteen-and-a-half-year-old child who had been in voluntary care for eleven years and living with their maternal aunt. The Child and Family Agency (CFA) sought the order.
The court heard that the child had had no contact with the father and sporadic contact with the mother. The father’s lawyer said his client did not oppose the order to 18 but sought to litigate access rights. The CFA lawyer said the agency had no intention of removing the child from the relative’s care. The judge said access would be a work in progress.
An alcohol and addiction service observed proceedings due to the mother’s ongoing addiction issues.
The social worker said the child had been in voluntary care since 2015 because both parents had experienced difficulties. The child had been placed with the maternal aunt and lived with her cousins. The child was very settled and had been there for over a decade. The maternal aunt and other family members attended court. The aunt said the mother had had no contact in recent times because the child refused to see both of her parents.
The aunt and social worker confirmed the mother consented to the order being sought by the CFA. The social worker said the mother hoped to improve her life and care for her children eventually but consented to the order at present.
The father’s lawyer asked about access. The social worker said the father made efforts to send letters but they should go through the CFA, as contact could not be forced with the child. The social worker accepted that no life story work had occurred. Regarding counselling, the social worker said no family therapy was underway, but the CFA generally encouraged it.
The guardian ad litem’s (GAL) lawyer said the GAL supported the order to the age of eighteen and sought a review in the coming months. The GAL said the mother had also informed him that she consented to the order sought by the CFA.
The judge said the child received exceptional care and her needs were being met. The judge said the child required stability and she saw siblings in the current arrangement. The child had had a recent assessment. She struggled academically but had strong verbal skills. The judge said the child was interested in becoming a hairdresser and he was anxious she be encouraged to stay in education for as long as possible. The judge said the father recognised this too.
The judge said the child did not want to speak to her parents now, but children’s attitudes change and everything remained open. He told the father not to lose heart and to give the child time, as nobody was perfect.
The judge stated that the threshold had been met in the case, as the parents ultimately could not care for the child. He accepted the order length was proportionate to age of majority so the child could get what she needed. The judge said the “big piece here is education” and he hoped the child would continue to the age of eighteen and then go on to third level. The judge said the CFA should facilitate access. He granted the care order to age of majority and adjourned the case for review in nine months.