Courts

Primary school challenges requirement to enrol profoundly disabled child

Board of management says the school lacks the expertise and access to supports required to meet the child’s needs

The enrolment application was refused on the grounds including that the school cannot cater for the child’s needs, the High Court heard. Photograph: iStock
The enrolment application was refused on the grounds including that the school cannot cater for the child’s needs, the High Court heard. Photograph: iStock
Aodhan O'Faolain
Mon Apr 29 2024 - 20:33

A primary school has brought a High Court challenge aimed at overturning a decision that it must enrol a profoundly disabled child whose family have sought international protection in Ireland.

The rural school received an enrolment application from the child’s family last year. The application was refused on the grounds that the child did not meet the criteria for enrolment and that the school cannot cater for the child’s needs.

However, that move was overturned by a three-person committee established by the Minister for Education. The school’s board has challenged that decision and has asked the High Court to overturn what it says is the committee’s flawed and irrational finding.

The parties involved in the action cannot be named for legal reasons. The court was told that the child is not currently attending the school.

READ MORE

The court heard that the school’s board of management says as well as its mainstream classes, the school provides special educational services for children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). It says inclusion is very much part of its ethos.

The school says its decision was based on a report it was furnished on the child’s behalf from a psychologist in a country neighbouring the family’s homeland. It stated that the child is profoundly disabled with a complexity of needs that require multi-specialist continuous support in a special school that has access to all the relevant supports.

The report went on to state that the child is aggressive, auto aggressive, has multiple disabilities and requires intensive interventions. The child’s mental health has deteriorated despite medication being prescribed.

The board said the school lacks the expertise and access to supports outlined in the report to meet the child’s needs. It added that enrolling a child who the report said needs to be placed in a special school would be inconsistent with the effective provision of education for the school’s pupils and would give rise to health and safety concerns.

The refusal was appealed to the Minister for Education. The appeal was heard late last year by a three person committee which was established by the Department of Education under the 1998 Education Act to deal with appeals over matters such as enrolment refusals and suspensions.

The committee upheld the appeal that and directed that the school enrol the child. The school‘s board has challenged that decision, which it says is flawed on several grounds and should be set aside.

As part of its action the board claims the hearing of the appeal was unusual and there was no translator present and the child’s mother had limited English.

It claims the chairperson of the committee directed the school to use Google Translate to understand her submissions, rather than adjourning the hearing, which the board says it should have done. It also claims that the committee acted outside of its jurisdiction and did not properly consider the effect of the enrolment of the child on the school’s students and staff.

The committee, it is also submitted, failed to take into account the contents of the report outlining the child’s complex needs, and that the child requires continuous support in a special school.

In its proceedings the board seeks various orders and declarations including an order quashing the committee’s decision that the school must enrol the child. It also seeks an order remitting the matter back to the Minister for a further hearing of the matter before a newly constituted appeals committee.

When the case came before Ms Justice Niamh Hyland on Monday, David Leahy SC for the respondents said his clients were not opposed to permission being granted to bring the challenge, but needed time to respond to the school’s claims.

The court was also told that a private tutor has been sanctioned for the child. The judge, who hoped that the parties might seek to progress the matter as soon as possible, agreed to adjourn the case to a date next month.