Dublin District Court extended an interim care order (ICO) in respect of a young boy where the Child and Family Agency had concerns about his mother’s mental health. An emergency care order (ECO) had been granted the previous month due to gardai involvement because of concerns about her mental health. She had threatened to harm herself and the boy and to leave the country. The boy’s father was unknown.
The boy was placed with his aunt with whom he had periodically stayed over the years. The solicitor for the Child and Family Agency (CFA) said that he was doing very well in his placement.
The social worker said that the Child and Family Agency (CFA) had concerns about the mother’s mental health, substance misuse, family home conditions and the boy missing a lot of school. There was no evidence that the mother had engaged in a mental health assessment and the CFA had only been told on the morning of court that the mother had attended her doctor. The social worker said that there had been no substantial engagement from the mother, and that the first step they required was for the mother to engage with addiction services to help her understand her drug misuse.
The CFA had assessed the family home which had no fridge, freezer, stove, or boiler and the washing machine was broken. Several windows were broken and there were numerous floorboards missing. In addition, the back garden was littered with significant refuse. The mother claimed that the appliance had only just broken and that she was waiting on the council to deal with the boiler.
The mother had attended three access visits with her son between court dates, however, one of the access visits was suspended because she was 45 minutes late.
The boy’s aunt had reduced her working hours to care for the boy but she was not receiving any payment for his care. The guardian ad litem (GAL) was concerned and suggested that the aunt receive the guardian payment without delay, and emotional and therapeutic supports should be set up for the boy.
The boy had a structured routine and was well fed in his placement, however, he was very upset and wanted to return to his mother’s care. His mother had told him several times that he would be home soon and that she would get him a scooter. The social worker said that when he was with his mother the boy would stay up all night playing PlayStation. The social worker said that she did not think that the mother has insight in the effect that her actions had on her son.
The barrister for the mother said that the mother had taken several steps in respect of the issues raised by the CFA. The mother had attended her doctor and had been referred to additional mental health supports, and she had engaged with a drug addiction program. All appliances were installed with the exception of the boiler which was due to be installed.
Also, the refuse in the back garden had been cleared and inquiries had been made about replacing the floors. The mother’s barrister said that a significant amount of work had been completed in five weeks.
The mother said that she had attended her GP and she would be attending a drug program. The CFA was worried about inappropriate text messages from the mother to her son, but the mother said that it was hard to ignore him because he kept texting her telling her he loved her and that he wanted to return home. The mother became very emotional and started crying.
The GAL acknowledged that the boy and his mother had a strong bond and that he missed her. She said that the boy struggled with structure and routine, particularly the night-time routine. Boundaries and discipline appeared to be a big change for him. He had a lot of freedom with his mother, and he could play with his friends and stay out which he was unable to do in care. Despite having a very good relationship with his aunt, the boy was very clear that he wanted to be with his mother.
The judge addressed the mother: “I commend you on the start of what you need to do. It is clear from the reports that your son loves and misses you and wants to return home. But it is also clear that he needs stricter boundaries. The court’s perspective is that he is settling in, and it is premature to send him home.”
The court extended the interim care order.