The case that started the courts' intervention in the provision of facilities for disturbed children was that of FN in 1995. This was heard by Mr Justice Geoghegan in the High Court. It concerned a 12-year-old boy in foster care who was diagnosed as suffering from "hyperkinetic conduct disorder" and was in need of placement in a secure unit.
Because none of the existing institutions were prepared to take him, a judicial review was taken on his behalf directing the State to provide suitable care. A place became available in an institution that did not specialise in his type of problem. However, Mr Justice Geoghegan said that, in principle, the State was under a constitutional obligation to cater for the special needs of such children. This formed the foundation for all subsequent cases.
These included that of a 15-year-old girl who went out of control following the death of her mother and who ended up in prostitution; and the case of a boy who exhibited violent behaviour towards his grandmother and small children. They needed care in units from which they could not readily escape, with highly-trained staff.
One such child, Kim O'Donovan, died of a drug overdose in a Dublin B&B this year after absconding from a health board institution.
Eight of these cases, two of them girls, were the subject of the appeal judged in the Supreme Court yesterday. They represent dozens of children with serious behavioural problems who often end up on the streets, prey to pimps and drug-dealers.
Most of the children came before Mr Justice Peter Kelly, who asked the Ministers responsible to explain in court why the facilities were not being built in accordance with a timetable drawn up by the relevant departments.
"It is no exaggeration to characterise what has gone on as a scandal", he said in a 1999 judgment.