Courts

Man with intellectual disabilities can return to live with mother, High Court rules

Judge told HSE and Tusla funding for placement in privately run facility is running out and cost €345,000 last year

Mr Justice Mark Heslin said the High Court cannot usurp the role of the HSE or Tusla which have no statutory obligation to continue to provide the man's placement. Photograph: Bryan O’Brien
Tue Jul 16 2024 - 17:31

A young man with intellectual disabilities who has been in a residential placement for 19 months can return to live with his mother, the High Court has ruled.

The court heard that HSE and Tusla funding for his placement in the privately run Nua Healthcare facility is also about to run out and it had cost more than €345,000 to accommodate him there last year.

The HSE said this was against a background of a “deeply regrettable landscape” for people with disabilities in two locations where challenges concerning the appropriate distribution of limited resources are a factor.

Some 1,083 individuals with unmet needs in relation to disability services have been identified by the HSE with 176 of them regarded as being in a high-risk emergency or crisis situation. The High Court last year directed an inquiry into the question of his transfer home and out of the residential placement under its wards of court jurisdiction.

READ MORE

The court heard the young man, who has intellectual disability and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, has expressed a wish to return to live with his mother, who supported the move.

However, his court appointed guardian opposed the transfer saying a transition (to home) plan for him was inadequate particularly given the absence of a risk assessment. She wanted the HSE and Tusla to agree to further funding so his placement in Nua Healthcare can continue. His father agreed with the guardian.

Mr Justice Mark Heslin said having considered all the evidence and submissions, he did not believe he could safely reach a finding that the proposed transfer is unsafe. Earlier, he said two psychiatrists had assessed the young man as a person of unsound mind and incapable of managing himself or his affairs.

The guardian had argued that while he had made progress in his 19 months at the facility, she did not believe he was yet at a level to safely transition to his mother’s home. The onus and focus should be on maximising his capacity and building on his progress instead of acting prematurely and putting him at risk of significant harm, the guardian said.

A Tusla aftercare manager told the court that if the transfer was refused there was no alternative accommodation.

The young man is already on the relevant city council housing list and, in this context, his needs and profile have been identified. Such is the council waiting list, however, that he would only be housed “somewhere between his 20th birthday and his 30th birthday”, the manager said.

In his decision, Mr Justice Heslin said the court cannot usurp the role of the HSE or Tusla which have no statutory obligation to continue to provide the current placement.

“Doing so would breach the separation of powers principle. It would also very plainly prejudice others, whose needs the HSE is attempting to meet from finite resources,” he said.

He was also satisfied that, going forward, the young man will have access, very regularly if not daily, to services provided by healthcare professionals familiar with the HSE’s safeguarding policy for vulnerable people and in a position to invoke its terms were the need to arise in future.