FF Hypocrisy on Children's Rights Exposed

national | health / disability issues | news report

Monday December 11, 2006 14:20

by Miriam Cotton

O'Cuanachain Judgment may be handed down on Wednesday

There is a strong possibility that the judgment will be handed down in the High Court on Wednesday, December 13, 2006.

This case is of huge significance to all people with a disability, their family and friends and the professionals who serve them. Such is the importance of this case that our government spared no expense to fight Sean O'Cuanachain who has autism and his parents. The State employed two full legal teams, one for the Minister of Education, Mary Hanafin and the Minister for Health and Children, Mary Harney and one for the HSE to win the right to deny Sean the education that was clearly benefiting him. The case was heard for an unprecedented 68 days from January to July 2006 at the expense of many million euros.

The critical point the State hopes to establish is that the entitlement of a person with disabilities to services like education is not based on need but is an entitlement based on what the State is prepared to supply and pay for.

This is the very point on which the State has based its two recent regressive unconstitutional pieces of disability legislation: the Education for Persons with Special Needs Act and the Disability Act. I think you can understand the ramifications of having our Constitutional right to services based on need established in the O’Donoghue and Sinnott Judgments, overturned.

The stakes are high. We need an enormous crowd to be on the steps of the court to cheer if all goes well, to shout if not, to show the nation the lengths our government is prepared to go to discriminate against persons with disability and to demand that the State accept its responsibility to children and adults with disabilities.

save preference

Comments (5 of 5)

Latest News

by M Cotton

Mon Dec 11, 2006 14:55

Confirmation just in that the O'Cuanachain Judgement will not be handed down in the High Court this Wednesday. The latest update is that a fore mention, not a judgement, will take place on Wednesday, December 13th.

Will post more information here as it comes in but the O Cuanachain's need as many people as possible to be present for the actual judgment.

More Information

by Aidan

Mon Dec 11, 2006 18:03

Hi Miriam

Do you have any further information on this topic/ constitutional case and judgment? I am currently working in the area of student support and a lot of it covers requirements on special needs. Does the universities act on access/needs have any input here?

More info from Eircom.net report

Tue Dec 12, 2006 14:07

"The State has failed to provide the necessary funding to meet the educational needs of a severely autistic five year old boy, it has been claimed before the High Court.

Sean O'Cuanachain, through his father Cian, of Woodbine Avenue, Mountain Bay, Arklow, Co Wicklow has brought proceedings against the Minister for Education, the Minister for Health, the South Western Area Health Board, the East Coast Area Health Board and the State arising from their alleged failure to meet his educational and health care requirements.

It is claimed the State has failed to provide Sean with adequate free primary education — 30 hours tuition per week — according to the system of Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA), which, Mr Justice Michael Peart was told, is a well established methodology of teaching children with autism which is recognised internationally.

Opening the case, Mr Paul Sreenan SC, for Sean, said the case is concerned with the past and the future. He was seeking compensation for the failure to provide appropriate education to date and also wanted to compel the defendants to provide adequate and appropriate educaiton into the future.

The court was told that in October 2002, Sean was diagnosed as having autistic spectrum disorder and it was stated he would require appropriate services from both the Health Board and the Department of Education. He has been in receipt of home tuition funded by the Dept for Education since December 2002 which funding was eventually increased to 15 hours per week by January 2004.

In November 2003, when Sean was aged three years and four months, he was assessed by an educational psychologist who recommended that he should have access to ABA tuition for 30 hours per week. However, it is claimed, that has not been provided.

The court heard that Sean's parents, Cian and Yvonne O'Cuanachain employed a Montessori teacher to work with him at Pixies pre-school, Arklow, Co Wicklow for five mornings per week between August 2003 and April 2004 which programme was part funded by the home tuition funding provided by the Dept of Education.

Since February 2004, Sean has been attending St Catherine's pre-school, Barnacoyle, Co Wicklow on a part time basis for 14 hours per week.

Sean has access to ABA which is funded by the State but for only less than half of the required hours, it was claimed.

In evidence, Yvonne O'Cuanachain said she gave birth to Sean on June 12th, 2000. When Sean was eight months old, she became concerned about his language development because he was not babbling or making noises as she would have expected.

When Sean was aged 12 months, she and her husband became "extremely concerned" about his development. Sean would not respond if his name was called or if a loud noise went off behind him."

CLARIFICATION OF STATE"S DUTY

by henry p

Tue Jan 23, 2007 21:01

Hopefully this case will provide clarification of the State's duty with regard to the education of children with autism. It isn't as black and white as it is portrayed in the media. Proponents of certain educational methodologies (especially Applied Behavioural Analysis) are selling their wares to parents as the only teaching method that works. The research evidence is not conclusive in this regard and the needs of children with autism are so varied that it is unlikely one method will cater for all.

The parents of children with autism deserve all the support the State can provide. However, care must be taken to ensure that a needs-driven rather than a methodology-driven approach is adopted to providing for the care and education of our most vulnerable.

When approached with advice about the "best method" of teaching children with special needs, seek advice from an impartial professional who isn't flogging one method only.

High Court Judgement

Fri Mar 23, 2007 14:34

It seems Mr Justice Peart today ruled that the autism-specific education provided by the state to children with autism is appropriate. We can only assume Justice Peart found expert testimony advocating an eclectic approach to teaching more convincing than that provided by the ABA lobby.

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Voltaire Network

FF Hypocrisy on Children's Rights Exposed

Comments (5 of 5)