An extremely disturbed teenage girl, who is not psychiatrically ill but greatly traumatised following neglect and sexual abuse as a child, does not wish to remain at the Central Mental Hospital but, in the absence of any appropriate place for her in the State, feels she has no option but to remain there, the Supreme Court was told yesterday.
Ms Mary Ellen Ring, for the girl, said that, in those circumstances, her instructions were to withdraw her client's appeal against a High Court order sending her to the CMH.
The 17-year-old girl was placed at the CMH last March on foot of an application by the State. The girl suffers from behavioural and personality disorders and is regarded as a serious risk to herself and others.
In 1997, the girl initiated proceedings against the State seeking orders directing it to provide appropriate accommodation and care for her. A series of reports from psychiatrists and psychologists have recommended the girl be placed in a secure unit with appropriate therapeutic facilities and operated by childcare professionals. However, no such facility exists in the State.
When making the unprecedented order sending the girl there on March 10th last, Mr Justice Kelly slammed the "legislative inaction" which he said had forced him into making such an order and criticised the continuing failure to enact the Children's Bill into law. He said he was sending the girl there "with reluctance and a heavy heart" because it was not an appropriate place for a child who was not mentally ill. "Where else can I send her?"
The case came before both the High Court and Supreme Court yesterday. In the Supreme Court, Ms Ring said she was not proceeding with an appeal against the order directing the girl's detention at the CMH.
In the High Court, Mr Justice Kelly made orders allowing the girl go on supervised outings after hearing evidence from the clinical director of the CMH.
The judge he was glad to hear that the girl had had improved substantially in the short time she had been in the CMH.
