Lynn Ruane (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 16:

In page 20, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following:“(a) by the insertion of the following paragraph in subsection (1):

“(a) if the Child and Family Agency is satisfied that every reasonable effort has been made to support the parents of the child to whom the declaration under section 53(1) relates,”.”.

I am conscious of the sensitive nature of the area that the Bill seeks to regulate. I am aware of the competing rights and obligations and the difficult task of the Minister when it comes to balancing those rights and obligations.

An issue of concern for me is the potential position some families might find themselves in, especially those on low incomes or vulnerable parents. Let us consider the children currently in the care of the State. A large majority of these children were born during a time of rapid boom and bust. Consecutive cuts to family support services, social welfare community projects and employment were matched with an increase in the number of children in care. There is a direct correlation between austerity and the number of children who went into care during that time. This is something we need to consider when discussing the removal of parental consent.

We have a long history relating to doing the wrong thing for parents and children. My amendment is perfectly reasonable. It provides for the Child and Family Agency to be satisfied that all possible supports were offered to the parents before consent is removed.

I have sat at many case conferences supporting and advocating on behalf of parents throughout my years working in the addiction sector. I can hone in on my experience in this regard. The problem also relates to people suffering with mental health problems or a disability, and those who have experienced domestic violence, following which the child has been removed from the home for safety.

I will offer one example. I remember a child being taken from the mother and the mother pleading with social services to find her a place in the Ashleigh House, Coolmine. The centre is for mothers who are addicts. It allows them to look after their children and receive treatment as well. There was a two-year waiting list at the time. The child was taken. As soon as the child was removed from the family, the offers of support from social services stopped. When the child is still in the home and the parents are trying to maintain the child in the home, there are offers of support, parenting courses and so on. However, when the child goes into foster care, the situation changes. If we are telling a parent to meet certain needs, for example, adequate housing, income or removing a violent partner from the household, we cannot tell her to do these things alone. We need to be sure that adequate supports and resources have been offered to parents to meet these needs.

In no sense would I ever wish to get in the way of getting a child moved towards a stable home or family. However, I believe it should be a requirement for the Child and Family Agency to be satisfied that all reasonable offers of support were made to the parents. If that is the case, then it is up to the parents to take those supports. However, if those supports and resources were never put in place, it would be a problem. If we fail to work with the parent to enable the parent to meet what is required to care for the child, then it is not a failure on the part of the parent; it is a failure on the part of the State. I am keen for the State to take some responsibility in advocating for parents and to offer them some assistance in meeting the needs required.