MRS Justice McGuinness was told in the High Court yesterday that a mother had had to educate her 15-year-old autistic son at home because the Department of Education had failed to provide educational facilities for him.
Education made available to autistic people must be that which meets their needs, said Mr Paul Sreenan SC, on behalf of the child, at the opening of an action against the State.
The mother is seeking an order directing the Minister for Education to provide free education appropriate to the needs of her autistic child. She also wants a declaration that the Minister has deprived her son of his constitutional rights.
Mr Sreenan said the child had attended a number of schools for periods but, on the whole, had been educated by his mother. The longest he had been in formal education was two years.
The mother had tried to learn what she could do for a child with autism. She spent an average of from four to 4% hours a day with her son.
After autism was diagnosed in 1986, the boy was sent to a Montessori school but he began to regress and, following consultation with a psychiatrist, it was decided to take him out of that school. He was educated at home until September 1987 and seemed to stabilise and improve.
When he went back to a mainstream school to see if he would improve further, he did not thrive and was subjected to bullying by other children. From January to April 1988, he was again taught at home and made progress.
He then went to two other schools and seemed to cope reasonably well. But when he was moved to a new class, he did not appear to relate to the teacher. That teacher effectively treated him as a normal eight-year-old which was a damaging approach to take with an autistic child.
The situation deteriorated and the boy started getting nightmares and bedwetting. It became necessary to remove him from the school. He was again educated at home and recovered ground which he had lost at school.
In November 1991, as a result of pressure on his behalf by certain politicians, a tutor was assigned to him but lessons were often cancelled at the last moment. In 1992, the child was again granted a home tutor. The tutor failed to turn up and then indicated he had no interest in the work. The mother continued to educate him at home.
Mr Sreenan said the strain was beginning to tell on the mother. The child was put into a special school but seriously regressed. He was subjected to repeated bullying. He was unsupervised in the school grounds and started to cut his hands and injure himself.
From 1994 until the present he had been educated full-time by his mother. The mother had attended many seminars and courses on autism. She was of limited means. She had sought assistance from the State on occasions but it was not afforded.
In 1995, her solicitor engaged in correspondence with the Department of Education. The Department suggested a person to educate him at home. After a number of attempts to contact the teacher, the mother was informed the teacher was on maternity leave and would not be available until January 1996.
The hearing continues today.