Three adjudicators, actively involved with child cases in care, expressed anxieties regarding the Child and Family Agency, Tusla’s ’emergency response’ method, in light of rising issues within the care system. Judges John Campbell, Conor Fottrell, and Miriam Walsh were particularly disturbed by the fact that over 230 children under care in two hard-pressed social work districts lack dedicated social workers. Additionally, they pointed out Tusla’s escalating dependence on unregulated niche emergency arrangements (SEAs) operated by private companies.
Judge Walsh described the practice of private firms capitalising on the state’s placement of children in unregulated care as “unpalatable”, equating it to profiting from the suffering of children. The trio pointed out that the system is under unusual strain due to factors such as a dearth of foster parents, social workers, and suitable placements for children who are vulnerable and at risk.
Judge Fottrell alluded to an evident crisis-management scenario. In response to a recent comment by Tusla CEO Kate Duggan, that they do not condone unregulated placements, Judge Campbell countered that Tusla continues to utilise these facilities and it is the courts that must handle the consequences.
“They stand as the agency accountable for childcare, they cannot merely invoke the best-efforts defence. They cannot simply wash their hands of it. If they are no longer capable of fulfilling their duties, they ought to publicly announce it,” stated Judge Campbell.
Rather than have the state pay substantial amounts to unregulated SEAs, Judge Fottrell suggested a more long-term strategy, including the potential construction or identification of residential units.
Observing that any commercial entity with a similar level of demand, would not hesitate to build more residential units or foster homes, Judge Campbell commented to the effect that the agency appears incapacitated either due to budget constraints or other reasons.
The judges highlighted the contrast between the faceless, supervisory role of Tusla and the hands-on, often challenging work of social workers in hazardous environments. “We appreciate the diligence and commitment shown by our social workers, who consistently rise above their regular duties,” commented Judge Fottrell.
In the Dublin Bridewell child care courts, the judges emphasised that the primary aim of all care proceedings is the welfare, safety and best interests of the child.
They shared their concern for children in care who are susceptible to manipulation from criminals and sex offenders. Judge Campbell recounted instances of young girls being taken from residential units in taxis, returning late at night with money and displaying anxiety the next day, needing professional help due to the incidents of the previous evening.
“Unfortunately, sometimes neither Tusla nor even the police show enough concern about this,” Judge Campbell said. “While such occurrences used to be rare, it is alarming to see them becoming more common,” lamented Judge Walsh. They further revealed a horrific account of a 17-year-old girl who suffered abuse, online exposure of intimate pictures, and was subsequently drawn into drug abuse.