26 October 2006
Dr. Henry: I welcome the Minister of State and the Bill. As Senator Glynn said, some of the issues in the Bill have been of concern to foster parents for quite some time and it is only right we should try to address them. The Minister of State's figures were very interesting. Some 4,250 of children in care - 84% - are in foster care. Are these children all in long-term foster care or are there additional children in short term foster care?
This Bill deals with children in long-term foster care. It is important we deal with this issue because, unfortunately, there is much breakdown in society which needs to be addressed. We no longer have the extended families we had in the past who would have been in a position to cope with a child bereft of parental attention for one reason or another. I was interested in the discussion about the pop singer, Madonna, and her adoption of a child from Malawi. It was said there is never really a child who is in an orphan in Africa because of the extended family. I will not get into the rights and wrongs of whether children should be adopted from abroad but it is interesting to think that we have perhaps lost a great deal of the support of the extended family while people in other places would keep a child if they had the means to do so.
I hope the Minister of State will do as much as he can to ensure there is plenty of social support and not only financial support for families who run into trouble, particularly in the case of single parent families where someone has a medical or a psychiatric problem and children must be placed in care. However, it is important that we assure such people that the social support they need will be there when they manage to overcome whatever difficulties they may have in order that their children are returned to them. Sometimes people feel that, although they voluntarily gave their children into care, they did not find it as easy to get them back as they had imagined. I cannot divulge the details of specific cases, but we have all occasionally had people address us on the issue. Social support for families is very important; the Government is making a good effort to bring forward financial support.
In going through this Bill, we must be careful we do not make unfortunate mistakes of the kind we did with the Social Welfare and Pensions Act 2005, in which we changed the definition of an orphan. In the new Bill the parents are required to have "abandoned and failed" to provide for their child, whereas under the old Bill it was "abandoned or failed". Of course we did not mean that both criteria had to be fulfilled, but it has given appeals officers an increased workload. I am glad to say that, as far as I can see, they have been very generous in their assessments. Usually it is a grandparent who has to deal with children in a situation where it is absolutely impossible to get them cared for by their offspring. We must go through this very carefully.
Perhaps we might be a little more daring in the Bill, changing the time period to three years for older children. I am anxious about the fact that there must be five years' continuous fostering. Let us suppose the child is voluntarily taken back by the parents after three and a half years and, despite our all hoping for the best, the situation breaks down again after three months, with the child returned to the foster parents. I know the courts appear to have plenty of discretion in such matters, but I would like us to consider individual situations with as much generosity as possible, particularly with older children.
The child's wishes, in so far as is practicable, have been given due consideration, having regard to its age and understanding. As the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, said, children are now allowed a louder voice in issues regarding their welfare. We may need to be as far-sighted as we can. The Minister of State quite rightly said that one did not want children to be embarrassed at school because they could not go on the school trip. However, good and generous foster parents, when trying to go to Torremolinos or wherever for two weeks, find that the foster child cannot come. Will the five-year criterion still apply? It appears it will, and that is why I wonder if we might not be a little more generous and make it three, particularly with older children. It is difficult at that stage, when everyone is getting ready to go off with one's bucket and spade. Perhaps we might do a little more for them.
I was interested to hear the Minister of State proposes to address issues that arose in the Ferns report. It is a good idea to include them here, and I am glad he brought them to the House, since I am sure we will try to go through them as slowly and as carefully as possible. It was very unfortunate to discover from the Ferns report that the community medical officer in one case acted ultra vires by questioning children about abuse, since one is entitled to do so only if the abuse took place within the family. That also might be addressed in this Bill; I am sure the Minister of State has other areas to include.
I am delighted with the thinking behind the Bill, and I am sure the Minister of State's concern is that the very best be done for children in such situations, respecting the fact that they may have parents hoping to give them a proper family life some time in the future. We must be as broad-minded as possible, particularly with older children, since they have a very good idea themselves of what they would like to see done. I am very glad to see the courts taking so much more notice of what such children say. Years ago the situation was pathetic, since children seemed to have no voice whatsoever. However, now one finds they are asked for their views.
I hope we can increase the number of psychologists available to the courts and the health service to deal with children who may have behavioural problems. Foster parents often have to deal with them before they become far more serious as the children become teenagers.
Visit the Irish Government Website for the full text of this speech
