Mother welcomes supervision of child by Child and Family Agency

A mother of a special needs child has welcomed continued supervision by the Child and Family Agency because the additional services it brought have made a "huge difference" to her child's life, the Dublin District Family Court was told yesterday.

The court heard a supervision order, which gives the agency the power to visit and monitor the health and welfare of a child in his or her own home, had been granted last month and the agency was now seeking to extend the order for six months.

The mother’s legal representative said she was consenting to the order and also welcomed the continued input of her daughter’s court-appointed guardian. Things had been going very well, she said, and the services offered to her had made a “huge difference to her child and family’s life”.

She also said the threshold for a supervision order was met through “no deficit” on the mother’s part and that caring for her daughter presented “huge challenges”.

Social worker
"She is happy for the order to remain in place so that she continues to get services," the mother's representative said.

Giving evidence in the case, the social worker said the health and welfare of the child had been neglected in the past and the agency was anxious that supervision continued. She said in recent months, there had been a change in the family’s attitude and they were now putting the child’s needs first.

Respite services
She said there had been issues with respite services having been cut and an alternative package had been worked out. The agency had secured initial funding for three months for this package and would continue with it "as required by the family". She also told the court that the unit the child was now attending was "provisionally registered" for children with special needs.

Judge Brendan Toale said the case could be described as a "success story".

“Everyone involved should be commended in relation to it,” he said.

In a separate case, the court was told of a shortage in finding foster homes for children in Dublin. In an application to extend the duration of a care order for two boys, a social worker said she was looking for a longer term placement for the boys and there were “no options available” in Dublin. She acknowledged it was not appropriate that she told the boys’ parents of this outside the court. She also accepted the boys might also have to change schools.

Judge Toale extended the interim care order until a full hearing of the case in September.