A disabled woman has secured a temporary barring order against her adult daughter after describing her as “dangerous, on drugs and desperate”.
Her daughter had been living with her and appears now to have gone back to her own apartment but “every noise I hear at night I fear is her breaking in”, the woman told Dublin district family court judge Gerard Furlong.
The judge was told the daughter, aged in her 40s, was an alcoholic and drug addict who drinks a bottle of spirits daily with which she mixes prescribed and illegal drugs including cocaine.
The woman said her daughter had stolen her bank card and “thousands from me”, had kicked in her front door and had physically attacked her son, who is the woman’s carer.
Mark O'Connell: The mystery is not why we Irish have responded to Israel’s barbarism. It’s why others have not
The music of 2024: Our critics’ verdicts on the best albums and acts of the year
‘One Christmas Day my brother set me on fire’: seven writers spill their most bizarre Yuletide yarns
Kellie Harrington fought hard for the dream ending she well deserved
She said her daughter “sleeps with knives under her pillow”, had threatened that she (her mother) would be “dead by Christmas” and that she would get her “scum mates” to beat up her son.
Her daughter had robbed her jewellery and gets verbally abusive, she added.
Judge Furlong, who said a protection order was not sufficient in this case, granted an interim barring order returnable next week when the woman could apply for a full barring order.
The interim order requires the woman’s daughter not to be violent, or to threaten violence towards her, not to watch or beset her and not to communicate with her, he outlined.
The woman’s application was among about 30 ex parte (one side only represented) applications for protection or other orders, sought under domestic violence legislation, before the judge on Friday.
In another application, a young woman said she was assaulted by her former partner when she drove to his home earlier this week to leave their child with him while she went to work.
She said he asked her “are we together” when she had told him “plenty of times” they were not and were “only civil” for the sake of their baby.
She said he jumped into the passenger seat of the car, boxed her in the face three times and pulled her hair. He also put a child’s toy through the windscreen.
This “happened out of nowhere” and her former partner smashed more windows when she went to call gardaí, she said.
Judge Furlong told the woman he would give her a protection order “straight away” for service by gardaí on the man. He returned the matter to April when the woman may seek a safety order for a period of up to five years.
In another application, a woman secured a protection order against her former partner whom she said had on different occasions since they had broken up last year kicked through the side entrance of her home, attacked her new partner and threatened her own home and her sister’s home. He had made many abusive calls to her, including that he would have her head smashed off the ground outside her work, she said.
Her ex’s behaviour had affected her children mentally, she added.
The judge said there was ample evidence for a protection order and directed the only communication the man may have with the woman was via one text concerning access to his young son.
In another case, the judge refused a protection order to a man who said he was suffering anxiety and sleeplessness because of his wife’s conduct. He said their problems had started when she met another man, he feared he would have to leave his apartment and was concerned he would be kicked out of their joint business. His wife had removed his access to their business account, stopped a wage increase for him and said negative things about him in front of colleagues, he said.
Judge Furlong said the man had not established an emergency situation requiring a protection order.
In a separate Dublin family court on Friday, Judge Cephas Power granted a five-year safety order to a woman who previously obtained a protection order against her former partner who did not attend court on Friday when the matter was returned.
The woman said her former partner had barged drunk into her home last August accusing her of having men in the house.
She said he had looked in rooms and wardrobes and woke her daughter. He returned to her home again last November and kicked the door in and went through every press and wardrobe, she said.
“He seems to think he can come whenever he wants,” she said. “He has a drink and cocaine problem and stalks me.”
She said she had one child with her ex but he had no access to the child since October. The fact he had not shown up in court for this hearing “shows he is not interested”, she said.
His conduct, she feared, would lead to her being thrown out of her rented home. “The only thing that protects me from that are these orders.”
Judge Power said he would grant the woman a safety order for the five-year maximum period. The man may communicate with the woman via only one text or email message a week which must be about access only, he directed.
In another case, a woman who previously got a protection order against her husband said she wanted a safety order.
“There is no violence but I feel afraid,” the woman said. She said she was subjected to emotional abuse by her husband, he did not give her money, told her what to wear, would not permit her go certain places, had not been intimate with her for five years, spoke critically about her friends, and spoke only in his native language, which she did not understand, to their children.
He was “constantly putting me down and ignoring me”, she said. She had gone to a women’s refuge at one point after he shouted at her over bills being too high and was told she was being subjected to coercive control, she said.
All of this was affecting her mental health, she said. She wants a separation but he had told her he could not separate for religious reasons, she said.
“I’m on depression tablets, I’m not able for it any more,” she said.
The man said he wanted a separation and was seeking accommodation for himself away from the family home but was having difficulty doing so because of the housing crisis.
He denied he was withholding money from his wife and said her signature was on an account with him and their daughter. Money may be withdrawn on the basis of two signatures, he said.
He denied he had screamed at his wife over a spoon being in the sink and about the price of electricity when she was watching television.
Judge Power said it appeared the protection order was working well and the main issue between the couple was about a separation. He continued the protection order and adjourned the matter to May to see if separation proceedings could be advanced.
In a separate case, a mother who got a protection order against her adult daughter last August agreed to accept an undertaking from her daughter to stay away from and not threaten her or communicate with her.
The mother told Judge Power she had come to court hoping to get a safety order for one year “hoping things will change”.
The daughter said she was employed and concerned to avoid having any order that might affect Garda vetting of her. She wanted no contact with her family, she said.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our In The News podcast is now published daily – Find the latest episode here
