Ms Orla Keane:

In February 2020, pre-Covid, we asked the Department of Health if we could meet it and the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, as was, to have a meeting about some of the queries or comments about the draft heads of Bill that we had received. That started a discussion between the two Departments. We understand that, because of Covid, that was put aside but there has been re-engagement with them again about this. We also met with the College of Psychiatrists of Ireland in September 2020 and, following that, we contacted the Department and suggested that the child and adolescent consultant psychiatrists from the college were open and willing to give input to the Department, and that has also happened. It is very much collaborative because everybody has little bits of the story to add.

In terms of consultation with this group, the commission has undertaken three extensive consultation processes involving service users, the most recent being on the rules and codes, which my colleague, Mr. Kiernan, has undertaken. We also involved service users in our strategic plan. We will be suggesting either to the Department or, indeed, to ourselves, if we end up doing rules and codes for children, that we involve them in that process. We had one of the child and adult adolescent groups, SpunOut, speak to the commission last year so we already have some contacts with those groups. We would hope some of the advocacy services could help and support us in progressing that.

In terms of the children's part of the Act, from my perspective, I was there in November 2006 when the 2001 Act was commenced, and there was only one section relating to children. This will be a major new departure and it is very welcome. However, there are a couple of issues I would ask the committee to look at. Some of the time periods in the Act relating to children are quite long. A child who is voluntary in an approved centre can be made involuntary but that takes 72 hours whereas for an adult, it takes 24 hours. Three days for a child is a very long time. In addition, the court can make orders for 21 days and three months. We had recommended to the Department that these orders should be for 14 days. Again, and we all see this during Covid, being in lockdown for three months is a very long time, so for a child to be on an order for three months is a very long time. That is something we would ask the committee to look at and maybe recommend that those periods be reduced.

The other point is that there is provision for ECT and for the commission to provide rules in regard to ECT. The commission, in its submissions, made some queries to the Department as to whether it had looked at international best practice and things like that. Again, the committee might revert to the Department and maybe tease out a little more the merits of ECT for children at 16 and 17 years. If it is the case that children are to receive ECT, the commission will then do a separate process in terms of the appropriate rules in that regard.

Another issue is that it is imperative that children have their own legal representation. It was a recommendation the commission put forward and one the Department has taken on board. We really want to maintain it because the children have to have a voice.

The final point is the new world we live in regarding technology. We are all here today and many of us are attending remotely. Children, particularly 16 and 17-year-olds, should be able to attend hearings relating to them remotely. I know that can be a challenge with some of the District Courts and Circuit Courts because of the facilities available to them, but many of them have had a lot of work done over the last while. I would really promote that provision. The more that children can be involved in the process and what is going on, the better.