A District Court judge in a rural town adjourned a review of a care order for a teenage boy who had been admitted to a special care unit. This teenage boy had a protracted history and significant needs. There had been numerous attempts to admit him to a special care unit, which the teenager himself had requested. These attempts had been thwarted because the special care committee had stated the teenager did not meet their criteria.
The judge who had heard this matter on all these occasions had attempted to progress his admittance to special care by directing the special care committee to attend court to explain how the teenager did not meet their criteria. However, on the day of the hearing the legal representative of the CFA informed the court that the teenager had been admitted to a special care unit one month earlier. He reported the teenager had been doing very well, had less suicidal ideation and had made some progress. He said there was still a long road ahead of the teenager, but he was now where he needed to be. The lawyer informed the court that the High Court would review the boy’s placement.
The judge said she was pleased that the teenager had finally been placed in a special care unit but asked what had been done to secure a step-down unit and placement for when he left special care. The lawyer said that the CFA had already started to look for and secure a step-down placement. He said they would take direction and work with the professionals from the special care unit to help direct what type of step-down placement would be needed.
The judge asked about the directions she had made in her previous orders and was told that the directions she had made as part of the District Court orders had been incorporated into the High Court special care order.
The lawyer for the GAL said that the GAL was relieved that the teenager had been admitted to a special care unit but remained concerned over the level of needs the boy had. The GAL was satisfied that he was in the best place. The GAL’s representative said that as the teenager was now placed in a special care unit their proceedings for a judicial review of the special care committee’s decision to not admit the teenager were withdrawn.
The judge said she would adjourn the review of the boy’s care order in the District Court for two months as the High Court would review the boy’s case in one month’s time.