A High Court judge has begun a hearing to determine the extent of the court's powers to detain troubled children in long-term secure care to meet their welfare and educational needs. The court is also considering what safeguards should be applied when such orders are made.
The application is being brought in the context of the case of a 15-year-old boy, who exhibited signs of difficult and sexualised behaviour from a very young age and has experience of sexual abuse. He has been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and was treated with the drug Ritalin at the age of eight and since. He has had 17 placements and has behavioural and attachment disorders.
The boy has been in voluntary care since he was six and has been in the statutory care of the HSE since October 2001. The latest care order extends to 2009, when he will be 18. It has been claimed that the care plan designed for the boy by the HSE has been influenced by the level of secure places available.
The outcome of the hearing before Mr Justice John MacMenamin is expected to have important implications for other children in care and it also raises issues about the adequacy of secure care and other placements for high-risk children.
The judge has ordered that the Attorney General be joined to the proceedings for the purpose of outlining his views to the court.
The judge is considering whether the High Court can make orders for the long-term detention in secure care of children where, on the evidence, such detention is required in the interests of their education and welfare. If the answer to that question is yes, the judge will consider what procedural safeguards should be put in place for the protection of children and their families in line with the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.
The 2001 Children Act states that a special care order may be made for no less than three months and no longer than six months but does not state if additional orders may be made on expiry of the first order.
In submissions yesterday, Cormac Corrigan SC, for the boy, argued long-term secure orders may be made. The needs of the child and not the issue of resources should be the priority.
Mary Ellen Ring SC, for the boy's mother, said the best interests of the child would have to dominate the court's consideration of whether a long-term care order should be made.
Maire Whelan SC, for the Attorney General, said the AG believes long-term secure orders may be made in certain exceptional circumstances for educational and welfare reasons.
The hearing continues today.
