A District Court in a provincial city granted a six-month care order for a young boy of primary school age who had been in the full-time care of his maternal grandmother since arriving in Ireland from an East European country two years earlier. The court had earlier granted an interim care order.
The boy’s grandmother had died the week before the interim care order application, and An Garda Siochana had invoked their emergency powers under Section 12 of the Child Care Act, 1991 to remove the child to safety. The court had subsequently granted an eight-day Emergency Care Order in respect of the child. The boy was currently in a foster care placement.
At this hearing, the Child and Family Agency (CFA) was applying for an Interim Care Order (ICO) for 29 days.
By way of background, the CFA’s solicitor told the court that when the boy had arrived in Ireland with his grandmother his mother had remained abroad. She did not know when the boy’s mother eventually came to Ireland.
In early 2024, the hotel manager at the mother’s International Protection Accommodation Services (IPAS) centre had raised concerns about the mental health of the boy’s mother. The boy’s grandmother had also been worried that the mother was not taking her prescribed medication and was behaving erratically. In addition, Tusla had received a referral from community workers regarding the situation. The CFA had subsequently applied to the court to grant guardianship to the boy’s grandmother, who had become his full-time carer.
The boy’s mother was in prison at the time of this hearing and was expected to remain there for approximately another two and a half months. The CFA’s solicitor said that, although the mother had previously instructed two solicitors – one for the child care proceedings and another for the criminal proceedings – she had not instructed either of them in respect of this hearing. She said that the CFA was not aware of any other person who could care for the young boy.
The mother, who had been produced for the purposes of the hearing, was in a highly agitated state. She had been provided with the services of a female translator. She told the judge that she wanted to have a male translator instead, but the judge said that this was not feasible and that she would have to accept whatever translator was available.
With no other known family members available to care for the young boy, the judge concluded that the mother was not in a position to care for him and granted the interim care order for 29 days. The judge also made a direction for medical consent to be provided if required.
The matter was put in for mention three weeks later and was scheduled for a full Section 18 Care Order hearing a week after that.
The judge directed that a body warrant be issued to allow the mother attend at the next court date and that an interpreter would also be available for that date.
When the case resumed a month later the Child and Family Agency (CFA) applied for a full Care Order for six months.
The boy’s mother was produced from prison. A translator was present in the court to assist her, but she did not have any legal representation. An advocate was also present in court to assist the mother. The mother was in a highly agitated state and insisted on talking and disrupting the proceedings from the moment the case was called before the judge. As a result, the judge asked the Gardai present with the mother to remove her from the court. The translator was asked to remain in court so that he could tell the mother what was going on during the proceedings.
The CFA’s solicitor told the judge that the original application before the court had been for a 12-month care order for the boy, but that, because the boy’s mother had no legal representation, she suggested that a six-month care order might be more appropriate to allow the mother more time to engage with the Legal Aid Board. However, she said that the mother was currently refusing help in prison.
The social worker told the court that the young boy had arrived in Ireland from an Eastern European country two years earlier. At the time, his mother had been in a different Eastern European country and was suffering from mental health issues. She arrived in Ireland later. The boy’s grandmother had had guardianship rights over the child. There had been many calls to the Gardai when the mother had resided with the grandmother and boy. On one occasion the boy had been punched in the face by his mother. This incident had led to the mother being separated from her son.
The boy had remained in the care of the grandmother until she had passed away recently. The boy had been transferred initially into emergency foster care for three days but had been in a different placement for the previous few weeks. However, this was also not a long-term placement.
The mother was receiving assistance from a charity that provided prisoner support to help her arrange the grandmother’s funeral, fill out various social assistance forms and also to help her engage with the Legal Aid Board.
The social worker had made enquiries to see if the young boy had any other relatives that could care for him. It had been rumoured that the boy’s father was deceased but she had had no actual evidence of this. She had met an uncle of the boy at the grandmother’s funeral, but he had advised her that he was not in a position to help or care for the child and she had had no further contact with him since.
She said that the boy’s mother was due to be released in a few months’ time. She was trying to encourage the mother to engage with services to help with her mental health issues. She said that the CFA’s application for a short six-month care order was proportionate in the circumstances and emphasised that the young boy had previously not been in his mother’s care in any event. The mother must be willing to engage with the services herself and she did not have anything organised for when she would be released from prison.
The social worker said that the boy’s current foster carers were a temporary arrangement to allow the boy go to school, be with his friends and to maintain familiar settings. Long term foster carers were actively being sought for the boy. She said that six months was a short-term care order and that a lot might change during that six-month period.
The judge asked the interpreter about how the mother was getting on. He told the court that the mother had improved in prison while on her medication. However, she had deteriorated again in recent times.
The judge asked the interpreter to explain to the mother that legal aid was available to her and that it was free.
The judge granted the care order for six months. In light of the fact that the order was a short one and would end within a defined time period, she did not direct any care order review. She said that the matter could be re-entered by the CFA if and when necessary and gave it liberty to apply.