Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

A barrister representing six children told the court that applications had been turned down more than a dozen schools Shutterstock

State has no special needs education facilities for more than 160 children, High Court told

One mother said in an affidavit that she was left in ‘a truly intolerable position’ as her son still had not received any place for the new term.

DISTRESSED PARENTS AND guardians of more than 160 autistic children have been told the State has no special needs educational facilities for them weeks after the start of the current school term, the High Court heard today.

Ms Justice Margaret Bolger granted leave to half a dozen applicants to apply for orders directing Education Minister Norma Foley and the National Council for Special Education to provide them with adequate and appropriate school education.

Barristers Joe Jeffers SC and Michael O’Connell SC, representing six children aged between five and 14, told the court that applications for spaces in schools with facilities for teaching special needs children had been turned down more than a dozen schools.

Both senior counsel, who appeared with Brendan Hennesy BL, outlined the stress faced by parents and guardians who did not have the abilities for home teaching of their children, some of whom had been waiting for two years.

One child of six had never even been accepted primary education assistance.

Mr Jeffers, who appeared with Patrick O’Neill of O’Neill Litigation Solicitors, said a number of other applicants had already been granted leave for orders against the State and a provisional date for the hearing of a test case had been set down for November.

Some of the cases now being listed behind that test case involved children not receiving any education.

Mr O’Connell, who appeared with Niamh Maher of Healy Law Solicitors, for three applicants, told Judge Bolger one of the parents of a child aged five had been told by schools in the south of the country they had no room for him even to start a primary special needs class.

Judge Bolger was told that the Ombudsman, two years on from a study of planning for the provision of school places for children with special educational needs, had last week issued a report which found that some, but not enough, progress had been made by the education authorities.

Mr Jeffers said that in all of the applications before the court there were individual if similar facts with subtle differences.

One mother told the court in an affidavit that she had been left in “a truly intolerable position” whereby the school year had started for yet another year and her son still had not received an indication of a possible place being available for him.

Judge Bolger, who heard that the families had come to court as a last resort, said she was satisfied to grant the parties leave and returned all of the cases until October 8 with directions that opposition papers be delivered four days before that date.

Nothing that might identify any of the parties involved in the applications before the court today may be published, the court confirmed.

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Close
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds