David Norris (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews. It is appropriate that he should participate in this debate because he is a caring and sensitive person who will take a direct and immediate interest in these issues. I also welcome the opportunity to pay tribute to those involved in foster care, foster parents and officials, most of whom are doing an extremely good job. Occasionally, however, one hits a snag, as I have learned through the several cases in which I have been involved.

Without providing details that might identify the persons concerned, I will refer to a particularly tragic case in which a young woman who was addicted to drugs had two children and subsequently suffered brain damage after an overdose. The grandparents in this case wished to take an interest in the children but met great resistance in this regard, not from those providing the foster care but from the authorities handling the case. Some of those bureaucrats were young people hardly out of college, the ink fresh on their diplomas, but they presumed to know more than the children's grandparents. Officials must show some sensitivity in such cases. The birth mother was wired up to various machines in an intensive care unit, yet because of some theoretical consideration, it was determined that the two children should be made to visit her once a fortnight. They left screaming because it was clearly a horrendous nightmare for them. There must be a balance between our understanding as human beings and the theory that may be dealt out.

The foster care system in general is creaking along somewhat. I emphasise that I have nothing but the highest regard for those involved in the system, apart from my reservations about the rigid application of academic ideas regarding the welfare of children in obvious defiance of their needs. The Minister of State indicated that there is a lack of data, which is a critical issue. To plan and make provision for the future, it is important that we should have an accumulation of data so that we know what the situation is and how it may best be progressed.

I have been briefed by a group with which I was previously unfamiliar, the Irish Association of Young People in Care, which was established in 1999. There has been some Government involvement with this organisation, with the Health Service Executive providing funding for a two-year project, the children's rights and participation project, under which there has been successful engagement with 1,000 people in the north Dublin area. It has been adopted by Vodafone for sponsorship as one of its particular charities. It seems, therefore, to stand in good repute.

One of the first issues the organisation highlights is the absence of up-to-date data, which it emphasises as vital. The group is optimistic and aspirational in its stated objectives, expressing the view that every young person in care should have an allocated social worker. I am not sure how practical that is within the current budget restraints. It also emphasises the importance of devising and implementing a care plan and that resources should be allocated on the basis of need rather than resources. That is certainly the case in an ideal situation but when resources are limited, tough decisions must be made. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to allocate to everybody on the basis of need alone, particularly in the current economic climate. For that reason, we must make the most efficient use of the resources we have.

The most up-to-date statistics, as far as I am advised, are from December 2005 when there were 5,220 young people in care. Of these, 85.6% were in foster care and 7.6% in residential care. This indicates how vital foster care is within the care system. Some 22% of those in care had been so for less than one year, 42% for one to five years and 36% for more than five years. The percentage of children in foster care is growing all the time. Some 44% of relative foster carers had children placed without approval. That is worrying, as is the lack of information. For example, we do not know how many children have been allocated social workers, nor do we have precise information on the ethnicity of those children. That may not have been an issue in previous generations but it certainly is now and is something that must be clearly addressed.

There are no statistics for the number of young people who exit the system completely at the age of 18, at which time they may be vulnerable. There seems to be no follow-up of such individuals. We must be informed of the outcome for these young persons. We cannot allow them simply to slide off the end of a conveyor belt without some knowledge of the end result. There is anecdotal evidence that children in long-term, stable foster care placements have better outcomes than those with multiple placements. It is vital that the data in this regard are made available. Children do not always stay in the same family grouping but may instead move from time to time. I assume that can be highly unsettling for a vulnerable young person.

There is a lack of up-to-date information on the numbers, roles and locations of social workers. The most recent data, from 2001, indicates there were 1,992 social worker posts with 307 vacancies. Within this figure is a worryingly high annual turnover rate of 18.1%, with health boards consistently reporting difficulties in recruiting. That is another problem. This high turnover of social workers, perhaps coupled with multiple placements, is unsettling for young people. There is no central core of stability in such an arrangement, which is precisely what is missing from these young people's lives.

There is no clear definition of a care plan. What are its objectives? Why is it in place and what should it cover? Very often it is merely a history. It is not a care plan looking to the future but one stating this, that or the other happened and we are now at point X. We should be trying to determine what the results of this historical survey imply and how the system can be improved.

According to national standards, the reviews of a young person's care plan are supposed to occur once every six months in the first two years of care. They are important because they detail issues such as contact with the family and so on.

After care assistance, which I already mentioned, is very important but it must be tightened up. We must bear in mind that over half of the 16 to 17 year olds leaving care do so in an unplanned way. That figure is astonishing. Those young people are vulnerable and in tumult and they leave the system in a way that is not planned for.

There are no data or Irish research on teenage pregnancy that occurs in foster homes and that is worrying.

I find it interesting that the primary reason for young people being placed in foster care is parental neglect. I want to reflect on that for a moment because sometimes we are lectured about the holiness of the family by what I regard as the more conservative voices in this debate. I came from a family, the same as everybody else, but it is a great mistake to make it just a shibboleth, define it narrowly and not recognise that there are occasions in which the family can be in dereliction of its duty. What about those children? Are they placed in an ideal situation? Should we bow down and grovel to the families that produced these cases of neglect? Should we not be more realistic and say that all these circumstances are human and that the institutions they deal with are human institutions and must be shaped and assisted in the interest of the human components and not in the interests of some mythical or ideological concept that makes a totem out of the family.

We must remember that 50% of the children in foster care are in that care directly because of parental neglect. That is not the responsibility of gay people. We are not undermining the family. We are not causing this parental neglect. That is something that exists and it must be taken into consideration as part of the spectrum of human experience in this country.