A man secretly recorded engaging “vile” exchanges with his mother before she was moved to a nursing home is disputing the High Court’s jurisdiction to make her a ward of court.
The president of the High Court, Mr Justice Peter Kelly, urged the man on Friday to concentrate on his mother's best interests and welfare, stop listening to "barrack room lawyers" and cease making "wild allegations" in court, including about doctors involved in treating her.
The judge told the man his very lengthy affidavit contends his mother’s best interests are served by her returning home but it ignored “a battery” of evidence to the opposite effect from medical consultants, and a court-appointed medical visitor.
“I suspect you are under the influence of barrack room lawyers who have not a clue what they are talking about,” he said.
The man disputes the court’s findings, based on several medical assessments, that his mother lacks capacity to make decisions concerning her health and welfare. He alleges she was “abducted” by the HSE and is now “falsely imprisoned” in a nursing home.
Refusal
The woman, aged in her 70s and with dementia and other health difficulties, was moved to hospital after one of her daughters secretly recorded interactions between the man and his mother and father in their home.
The man has raised issues about the legitimacy of the 33 minute recording made on his sister’s mobile phone in proceedings aimed at having his mother returned home to the care of himself and his father.
The man is also appealing another High Court judge’s refusal to his challenge to the legality of his mother’s hospital detention and all that has occurred since. He alleges the procedure under which his mother was made a ward of court involved violations of human rights and abuse of power.
He has entered a conditional appearance in the case concerning his mother which was mentioned before Mr Justice Kelly on Friday to deal with issues concerning exchange of documents.
The man alleged his mother received “botched” treatment in hospitals some years ago and said he was awaiting material from the relevant hospitals.
The judge made directions for exchange of documents and returned the matter to late November.
Earlier, the judge declined to recuse himself from further dealing with the case or to refer issues concerning the High Court wardship jurisdiction to the Supreme Court for determination and urged the man to focus instead on his mother's welfare.
Love
The man said his mother’s best interests are his priority but she has “never been asked what she wants”.
“All I have done is for love of my mother,” he said.
Arising from allegations by the nursing home about the man’s behaviour when visiting his mother, he continues to be restrained from doing so.
The judge told the man, if he provides sworn undertakings concerning behaviour during visits, those could be permitted and the matter was “entirely in your hands”.
Certain conditions had been applied to visits by his father following claims the latter had tried to remove his wife from here on one occasion and on another had tried to give her an orange liquid.
In court on Friday, the father said the claim he tried to take his wife out was “ridiculous”.
He said his wife had not been out of bed in six weeks and all he had wanted to do was take her out of the bed and let her sit in a wheelchair for a time. Because a wheelchair was not to hand, he went to his car to get the one he used for her, he said.
Having obtained sworn undertakings from the father concerning visits, Mr Justice Kelly said he was happy for the man to visit his wife. Such visits are very important because her prognosis is not good, the judge stressed.
