Tusla’s use of unregulated, unregistered placements for children seeking asylum should be reviewed, Dublin District Court heard on Thursday.
Judge John Campbell heard two calls for reviews in respect of three unaccompanied children who arrived in the State in recent months and were placed in special emergency arrangements.
These are placements operated by private operators, typically in B&Bs, hotels or rented dwellings, and are not subject to regulations or inspection by health watchdog Hiqa.
In one case, the judge heard that a boy who had experienced significant trauma before arriving in the Republic was placed in a special emergency arrangement under section 5 of the Childcare Act, according to which a child who is homeless should be provided with accommodation.
RM Block
The boy’s guardian ad litem, Dr Niall Reynolds, was recommending a review of the use of section 5 and the special emergency arrangement in the boy’s case, said barrister Brian Barrington.
A guardian ad litem is an independent person, appointed by the court, to be the voice of the child.
Section 5 provides a lesser level of protection than that provided under section 4 of the Act, which sets out when a child should be taken into care as well as being accommodated.
Mr Barrington said it was “clear … that ... this is a child that required care as opposed to merely accommodation”.
The boy, in respect of whom an interim care order was made last month, is now in a regulated placement.
The judge heard that when making the interim care order, Judge Conor Fottrell had been “sympathetic” to a review of the use of a special emergency arrangement and section 5.
Eoghan Wallace, a solicitor for Tusla, said on Thursday he would be “seeking instruction” on the matter and suggested he could address the issue in a week.
Judge Campbell said he would adjourn the matter “but only until Monday”.
He believed section 5 was a provision envisaged for such situations as where a child is found homeless and “begging on the street” but “was never envisaged ... as a wholesale measure” to deal with a number of asylum seekers.
The guardian ad litem for two child asylum seekers, Aoife Keely, sought a review of the circumstances in which they were placed in a special emergency arrangement under section 5.
They had experienced significant trauma before they arrived in the Republic earlier this year, the court heard, and required more than just accommodation.
Ms Keely was “eager to have a review” of the use of the measure and section 5 in their case, said Mr Barrington.
They were now in a regulated placement and subject to interim care orders, the court heard. Making those orders last month, Judge Fottrell heard they had been in three unregistered special emergency arrangements in the previous three months.
“This court has repeatedly expressed serious concerns ... and ... reservations on the ongoing use of special emergency arrangements for children in care,” he said.
“The court acknowledges and is aware of the demands that are being placed, the unprecedented demand that is being placed on the child and family agency [Tusla].
“But I have said it before, it is deeply concerning and troubling to witness the placement crisis that we have to deal with on a daily basis here in the court.”
Sinéad Kearney SC, for Tusla, said the boys were now in a registered placement and there was “no urgency” about a review. Judge Campbell adjourned the matter until Monday.
