Vulnerable woman (18) objects to bid to make her a ward of court

A “deeply vulnerable” young woman with a traumatic history who is considered a “very serious” risk to certain persons is objecting to being made a ward of court.

A petition by the Child and Family Agency (CFA) seeking to have the 18-year-old woman made a ward was adjourned at the High Court on Monday at the request of her lawyers to allow another psychiatrist assess her for the purpose of the wardship inquiry. The assessment was sought by her lawyers following earlier psychiatric assessments.

One psychiatric report has suggested her various disorders suggest a “fluctuating capacity” while two other psychiatrists, and a court-appointed medical visitor, have concluded she lacks capacity to make decisions concerning her welfare.

The wardship petition refers to disorders including a reactive attachment disorder and a sexual sadism disorder.

The CFA considers she may need to be placed in a UK specialist unit as her complex case exceeds anything the services here have come across.

Barry O’Donnell SC, for the CFA, told High Court president Mr Justice Peter Kelly on Monday that, in the “unusual” circumstances of the underlying complexity of the woman’s condition, the agency was not objecting to an adjournment for the purpose of getting another psychiatric report.

The woman appears reasonably stable in her secure care placement here and a team from a UK unit hope to assess her next month for possible placement there, he said. Other options are also being examined, he added.

Mr Justice Kelly said he would adjourn the matter for further review to late March to allow for the psychiatric assessment and progress concerning the assessment by the UK unit.

The judge noted the woman is not seeking a jury trial of her objection to wardship with the effect the wardship inquiry can proceed before a judge on a date to be fixed.

The CFA late last year obtained various orders continuing secure detention of the woman beyond her 18th birthday and pending the outcome of the wardship proceedings. She is separately subject of District Court criminal proceedings.

The woman and her court appointed guardian are separately represented in the wardship case because her view about what is in her best interests are “diametrically opposed” to the guardian’s. She also objects to her mother continuing to have any involvement in the case and that matter will be addressed later.

The judge was previously told the woman presents an “immediate and very serious risk” to certain people and to particular categories of people. There is a prior history of assault and sexual violence and an incident last year had lead to her admission to special care.

She had described her intentions and a large knife was found, the court heard.

A form of “deep-seated disordered thinking” was illustrated in that she had, on the one hand, set out in a manuscript a plan to kill and mutilate someone which was not treated as a “fantasy” but a “definite” threat while, on the other hand, she talked about wanting to go to college and pursue a career.