The obligation of the State to provide for the needs of troubled children might not cease at the age of 18 in light of a recent landmark court decision, the High Court was told yesterday.
Mr Mark de Blacam SC, for a disturbed 17-year-old girl, said in light of the recent decision in the Sinnott case he may argue at a later date that the State's obligation to his client would not stop when she reached her 18th birthday.
In the Sinnott case, the High Court held the State's constitutional obligation to provide for the education of a 23-year-old autistic man was based on need, not age.
He told Mr Justice Kelly the issue may yet have to be ruled on by the High Court.
Mr Justice Kelly said that even if the Sinnott decision was upheld by the Supreme Court, the courts would still have to determine whether it applied to at-risk children.
The matter arose when the judge was reviewing the case of the 17-year-old girl, who remains in a controlled therapeutic unit.
The case was at the centre of a political storm last month when the judge indicated that three Government ministers would be in contempt of court unless a place was found to detain her.
The girl had escaped on October 13th from the theraputic unit and there were serious concerns about her welfare. She was located on October 22nd and the judge approved her return to the unit.
Yesterday, with the agreement of the health board and lawyers for the girl and the State, the judge approved the implementation of a phased exit plan for the girl from the unit.
He said she had shown little co-operation with care plans in recent times and the idea of the phased exit programme was to give her some incentive to co-operate and something to look forward to.
