A disturbed boy who urgently requires therapy cannot receive it because he is inappropriately placed in a remand centre and there is no suitable place available for him, the High Court heard yesterday.
Mr Justice Kelly said this child was not alone, there were many others like him and the case underlined the lack of facilities available to deal with troubled children. The judge also noted the Minister for Health and Children is to proceed on Monday with his appeal to the Supreme Court against the judge's order directing the Minister to adhere to his own time-scales for the building of units for disturbed children in health board areas outside Dublin.
The judge was dealing with the case of a boy, now aged 16, who has been in care since he was nine. There is no parental involvement but his grandmother is said to offer some stability in his life. He has exhibited serious behavioural difficulties but was said yesterday to have stabilised a little since being placed in Oberstown Boys' Centre for the past five months .
The boy has received no therapy at Oberstown because management there believes he is misplaced and does not want him to embark on a therapeutic programme which would have to be interrupted. A report from a consultant psychiatrist has also stated therapy would be inappropriate in what is effectively a prison setting, and what the boy required was to be placed in a secure structured setting with therapeutic supports.
Mr Brian Hogan, deputy director of Oberstown, said the boy should not be in Oberstown and it would be harmful to initiate a therapeutic programme until there is a definite decision about where the boy will be placed during the coming months. He said the boy himself was anxious about his future.
Mr Aidan Waterstone, of the Midland Health Board, said there was no appropriate secure place available for the boy in any health board area in the State. Inquiries as to places abroad had not yielded positive results.
He said the boy had stabilised recently and this created an opportunity to help him. Given the boy's age, there might not be another such opportunity. The board was anxious to provide therapy for the boy at Oberstown.
Mr Justice Kelly said he had little option but to direct that the boy remain in Oberstown; the unit was not appropriate but there was no other place.
The judge said he would not direct that therapy be provided at this point because it was not desirable until a more long-term plan for the boy became available.
