Mary Butler
Waterford · Fianna Fáil · Ireland
“Major improvements are happening across services: enhanced access to proactive and preventive healthcare to support a better quality of life; the embedding and upscaling of women's health initiatives put in place through the implementation of the previous women's health action plans, including, as the Senator knows, free contraception, sp…”
“In relation to any proposal, a proposal for a new location requires a detailed business case, a premises, support from the regional HSE management, and the necessary funding to resource the staffing of the service. That is where I come into it and what I will be trying to do.”
“We are currently working closely with it to support the expansion of Jigsaw services to Waterford and the south east, as well as to County Clare. The location of Waterford was picked because we have no services in the south east at all. It is great that we will have the hub and spoke model the Senator spoke about.”
“That is where I do not agree with the Senator. I believe €180 million of funding ring-fenced for women's health, when we have come from a low base, is absolutely unbelievable.”
“The plan will build on our knowledge of women's health through research and innovation and will spotlight important areas such as endometriosis and cardiovascular health. Recently, the Minister announced €2 million in funding for women's health research.”
“This plan will continue to focus on how we can improve access to specialist endometriosis care and treatment. As the Senator knows, we have established two super-regional specialist centres, one in Tallaght University Hospital and another in Cork, alongside the development of five regional endometriosis hubs.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,499 lines we hold for Mary Butler, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 23 of 50.
“If a child has a mental illness or mental disorder, whether they are self-harming, suicidal or dealing with any of the myriad issues children face - in many cases, it could be emotional distress or bullying - due weight has to be given to their voice. It is important that the voice of the young child, young teenager or young person is heard. It is important their voice is included because you cannot just decide to treat a young person in a certain way. Parents sometimes do not agree with certain types of treatment. Let us take as an example a young transgender child, an issue on which I can speak with authority. There are times when a 14- or 15-year-old - they could be 15 and a half or 15 years and 11 months - might want to go down a specific pathway and they do not have the support of their parents or guardians.”
“The Mental Health Commission will have a significant role and will be extremely busy when it comes to governance issues, CAMHS, those living in community residences and changing the age of capacity in respect of 16- and 17-year-olds. We will not be in a position to change all of that until the relevant safeguards are in place. There will be no rushing this. At the same time, I do not want it to go on forever either. We will have to be really sure that when we make the change that 16- and 17-year-olds will have the power to consent in relation to their own mental health, with or without capacity and with and without the support of their parents, their guardians or Tusla. All that can only happen when I am confident that we have the best supports in place to make sure it can happen.”
“Professor Philip Dodd, the assistant chief medical officer in the Department of Health, supports me for two and a half days each week in the context of the work I do. He is also a consultant psychiatrist. I am very confident about the supports available to me and about the work I will be doing with the Mental Health Commission. The stakeholders and, importantly, the voices of the parents must also be considered. I am a parent. There are many parents sitting in this room today. When and if the Bill is passed - I am confident it will be passed with the support of all the Senators - we will move to the enactment stage.”
“Starting with Senators Black and Harmon, who raised the same issue, these amendments propose the replacement or removal of the term "due weight". We discussed that at length and felt it was more appropriate to remove it from the wording. I thank Senator Harmon for withdrawing her amendment, particularly as the issues she raised are dealt with in amendment No. 37. In the context of what Senator Costello said, the Mental Health Commission will be responsible for publishing codes of practice in relation to capacity assessments for children. Prior to publishing these codes, the commission will engage with stakeholders and consider every aspect of what capacity assessments for 16- and 17-year-olds should look like, who can carry out those assessments and what supports will be needed for young people and their parents throughout the process.”
“We simply cannot have a situation where children accessing inpatient mental health services are being treated unequally compared with those accessing physical health services arbitrarily. There may be cases where a young person aged 16 or 17 wants to access mental health services but cannot do so because his or her parents do not agree or are unwilling to consent on his or her behalf. This provision will ensure that young people can access inpatient mental health services.”
“An application for a treatment order can be sought from the District Court where the parent or guardian of a child cannot be found, if Tusla is not already involved, or where the parent or guardian of the child is given the opportunity to consent or refuse on behalf of the child and fails to do so. This is an issue that has been raised quite a lot by Senator Ruane. It is important to note that where an application is made to the High Court, treatment may be administered to a child for a short period that is limited to 72 hours. Again, this is if the child is at risk of causing harm to himself or herself or to others and the treatment is in his or her best interests.”
“Therefore, if the treatment is refused by the parents of a child, an application may be made to the High Court to seek a treatment order and the view of the court on whether such treatment is necessary, in the best interests of the child, to protect the health or life of the child from immediate and serious threat. I am confident that the safeguards are there to support those who are under and over 16 who either have or do not have capacity. Where a child is under 16 or over 16 and lacks capacity, the HSE can apply to the District Court to seek a treatment order in limited circumstances. As Senators know, we spoke about this last week when we discussed the changes that coming and that will apply in respect of the family courts when the Bill becomes law.”
“For the admission of children over 16 who lack capacity it is by parental consent and the parent or guardian of the child is responsible for consenting to or refusing treatment for as long as the child continues to lack capacity. In the context of involuntary admissions, children who have capacity can consent to or refuse treatment. There are safeguards involved here. People can forget that there are such safeguards in circumstances where children pose a risk to themselves or others. If children lack capacity, the parent or guardian of the child can consent. We also must remember that there are instances where a parent does not give consent, despite the fact that a child might need treatment.”
“This is the area where we will be able to put the safeguards in place. The Mental Health Commission is the regulator of mental health services and is also responsible for the Decision Support Service, making it uniquely qualified to carry out this function. Extending the presumption of capacity to make decisions to 16- and 17-year-olds is broadly supported among stakeholders, including the Mental Health Commission. I will briefly set out the consent to treatment provisions for children in the Bill and the protections in place. For the voluntary admission of children under 16 years of age, the parent or guardian of the child is responsible for consenting to or refusing consent to treatment. For the voluntary admission of children over 16 years of age, the child consents to or refuses treatment with safeguards.”
“The Mental Health Commission will step in at that point and will be responsible for publishing codes of practice relating to capacity assessments for children. When any Bill is passed, there is an enactment stage. In the context of this Bill, it could be up to two years before all the different aspects are commenced. As a result, there will be plenty of time for engagement with the commission, stakeholders and parents in order to consider every aspect of what capacity assessments for 16- and 17-year-olds should look like, who can carry them out and what supports will be needed for young people and their parents throughout the process. I have been asked by some groups, especially those who have 16- and 17-year-olds who might have eating disorders, how it will be managed with the 16- and 17-year-olds having capacity to give consent.”
“Where a child lacks capacity, the Bill contains a number of safeguards to ensure that care and treatment can be administered by way of parental consent. These provisions will be discussed again later when we reach the groupings relating to Part 4. The Mental Health Commission will be the body responsible for publishing codes of practice relating to capacity assessments for children. Prior to publishing these codes, the commission will engage with stakeholders in order to consider every aspect of what capacity assessments for 16- and 17-year-olds should look like, to identify who can carry out these assessments and to identify what supports will be needed for young people and their parents throughout the process. This is an important element of what will happen when the Bill has been passed by both Houses.”
“I thank everyone or being here this morning. Amendment No. 37 replaces subsection (1)(c) in the section on guiding principles for children and proposes new paragraphs (c) and (d) to differentiate between the role of parents and guardians of children who are under 16 and those who are over 16. The amendment clarifies the guiding principles to ensure there is a presumption of capacity for children aged over 16. Where a child has capacity, the views of his or her parents are recorded. That is the important part. This amendment does not represent a change in policy. Rather, it is needed to clarify our policy position and ensure it is clear that children over 16 will be presumed to be able to make decisions about their care and treatment.”
“-----and that the Order of Business might be agreed. I contacted all the Whips last Saturday to let them know that, following a request from Deputy Collins, and after speaking to the Minister, Deputy Heydon, and the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, the Ministers would like to facilitate statements on fisheries. That is being facilitated tomorrow afternoon. It will be a full round, so that limits the amount of other time that is available. I remind all Whips from the Opposition parties that they can use their time on Leaders' Questions, Private Members' business, Topical Issues and Questions on Policy or Legislation to raise the myriad of important issues outlined. I wish everyone a very happy Christmas. The Order of Business stands.”
“in relation to the proceedings on the Second Stage of the Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) (Amendment) Bill 2025, the following arrangements shall apply: (a) subject to subparagraph (ii), the proceedings shall, if not previously concluded, be interrupted and stand adjourned after 3 hours and 24 minutes and the order of speaking and allocation of time shall be as follows: (i) the arrangements for the first speaking round shall be in accordance with those contained in the table immediately below (to be read across, not down); (ii) where speeches conclude before the 3 hours and 24 minutes have elapsed and no other member is offering, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes; and (iii) members may share time; and (b) the proceedings shall not be resumed on Thursday.”
“and shall in any event be taken on the adjournment of the Second Stage of the Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) (Amendment) Bill 2025, with consequential effect on the commencement time for the Motion re Report entitled “Report on Pre-Legislative Scrutiny of the Health (Assisted Human Reproduction) (Amendment) Bill”: Provided that where the Second Stage of the Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) (Amendment) Bill 2025 concludes within the available time, topical issues shall be taken on its conclusion; and (iii) the Dáil shall adjourn on conclusion of the Motion re Report entitled “Report on Pre-Legislative Scrutiny of the Health (Assisted Human Reproduction) (Amendment) Bill”; and (b) the Dáil on its rising shall adjourn until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 13th January, 2026; and 2.”
“the proceedings on the Motion re Presentation and Circulation of Revised Estimates 2026 shall be taken without debate and any division claimed thereon shall be taken immediately. In relation to Thursday's business, it is proposed that: 1. (a) the ordinary routine of business as contained in Schedule 3 to Standing Orders shall be modified to the following extent: (i) pursuant to an Order of the Dáil of 3rd December, 2025, Parliamentary Questions to the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance pursuant to Standing Order 47(1) shall be taken for 96.5 minutes immediately following the SOS; (ii) topical issues may be taken earlier than 7.24 p.m.”
“2) Regulations 2025 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 60 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply thereto: (a) the two motions shall be debated together, with separate questions put on all proceedings thereon; (b) the order of speaking and allocation of time shall be as follows:- opening speech by a Minister or Minister of State – 10 minutes; speeches by representatives of Sinn Féin, the Labour Party, Social Democrats, Independent and Parties Technical Group, and Independent Technical Group – 7.5 minutes per party or group; speeches by Other Members – 7.5 minutes in total; and a speech in response by the Minister – 5 minutes; (c) members may share time; and (d) any divisions demanded shall be taken immediately; and 9.”
“the proceedings on Report and Final Stages of the Proceeds of Crime and Related Matters Bill 2025 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 30 minutes by one question which shall be put from the Chair, and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration; 8. the proceedings on the Motion re Proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) Regulations 2025 and the Motion re Proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) (No.”
“the proceedings on Committee and remaining Stages of the Appropriation Bill 2025 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 90 minutes by one question which shall be put from the Chair, and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation; 6. the proceedings on Report and Final Stages of the Credit Review Bill 2024 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 30 minutes by one question which shall be put from the Chair, and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Finance; 7.”
“the Statements on Fisheries shall not exceed 3 hours and 32 minutes and the order of speaking and allocation of time shall be as follows: (a) the arrangements for the statements, not including the Ministerial response, shall be in accordance with the arrangements contained in the table immediately below (to be read across, not down); (b) following the statements, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes; and (c) members may share time; Gov SF Lab Gov SF Mins 35 25 15 15 5 SD Gov SF IPTG Gov Mins 15 15 5 12 15 SF ITG Gov SF OM Mins 5 12 15 5 8 5.”
“in relation to the proceedings on the Second Stage of the Public Health (Single-Use Vapes) Bill 2025, the following arrangements shall apply: (a) the proceedings shall be interrupted and stand adjourned either after 1 hour and 30 minutes or where no further member is offering, and the order of speaking and allocation of time shall be as follows: (i) the arrangements for the first speaking round shall be in accordance with those contained in the table immediately below (to be read across, not down); and (ii) members may share time; and (b) the proceedings shall not be resumed on Wednesday; Gov SF Lab Gov SF Mins 20 20 20 12 4 SD Gov SF IPTG Gov Mins 20 12 4 20 12 SF ITG Gov SF OM Mins 4 20 12 4 20 4.”
“when the order of business shall resume with the Appropriation Bill 2025; (c) any motions to be taken without debate shall be taken on the conclusion of the Motions re Proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) Regulations 2025; and (d) the weekly division time shall be taken on the conclusion of proceedings on any motions without debate, and the Dáil shall adjourn on the conclusion of the weekly division time; 2. notwithstanding anything in Standing Order 177(2), the proceedings on Second Stage of the Animal Health and Welfare (Ban on Fox Hunting) Bill 2025 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 2 hours; 3.”
“Gov SF Lab Gov SF Mins 20 20 20 12 4 SD Gov SF IPTG Gov Mins 20 12 4 20 12 SF ITG Gov SF OM Mins 4 20 12 4 20 In relation to Wednesday's business, it is proposed that: 1. the ordinary routine of business as contained in Schedule 3 to Standing Orders shall be modified to the following extent: (a) the time allotted for Government Business shall be extended in accordance with the arrangements for that business and the Dáil may sit later than 9.30 p.m.; (b) in the event that the Statements on Fisheries conclude before 7 p.m., the sitting shall stand suspended until 7 p.m.”
“the proceedings on the Second Stage of the Appropriation Bill 2025 shall be brought to a conclusion after 3 hours and 34 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: (a) the arrangements for the first speaking round shall be in accordance with those contained in the table immediately below (to be read across, not down); (b) on the conclusion of the first speaking round or where speeches conclude before the 3 hours and 24 minutes have elapsed and no other member is offering, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes, whereupon proceedings shall be brought to a conclusion; Provided that any division claimed on the Second Stage proceedings shall be taken immediately prior to Committee Stage on Wednesday; and (c) members may share time.”
“the proceedings on the Motion re Ministerial Rota for Parliamentary Questions shall be taken without debate and any division claimed thereon shall be taken immediately; 5. the proceedings on the Motion re Restoration of Private Members’ Bill to the Order Paper shall be taken without debate; 6. the proceedings on the Motion re Report of the Committee on Standing Orders and Dáil Reform on Rota for Leaders’ Questions pursuant to Standing Order 38 shall be taken without debate and any division claimed thereon shall be taken immediately; and 7.”
“and shall in any event be taken on the conclusion of the Second Stage of the Appropriation Bill 2025, with consequential effect on the commencement times for the items following in the ordinary routine of business, namely, Parliamentary Questions to the Minister for Defence and topical issues; 2. the proceedings on the Motion re Referral to Joint Committee of Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) (No. 2) Regulations 2025 shall be taken without debate and any division claimed thereon shall be taken immediately; 3. the proceedings on the Motion re Appointment of Members of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission shall be taken without debate and any division claimed thereon shall be taken immediately; 4.”
“Thursday's business shall be: - Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) (Amendment) Bill 2025 (Second Stage) (if not previously concluded, to adjourn after 3 hours and 24 minutes) Thursday evening business shall be the Motion re Report entitled "Report on Pre-Legislative Scrutiny of the Health (Assisted Human Reproduction) (Amendment) Bill", sponsored by the Committee on Health. Proposed Arrangements for this week’s business: In relation to Tuesday’s business, it is proposed that: 1. the ordinary routine of business as contained in Schedule 3 to Standing Orders shall be modified to the following extent: (a) the time allocated to Government business shall be extended in accordance with the arrangements for that business and the Dáil may sit later than 10.48 p.m.; and (b) private members’ business may be taken later than 6.12 p.m.”
“2) Regulations 2025* - Motion re Presentation and Circulation of Revised Estimates 2026 (without debate and any division claimed to be taken immediately) * Back from Committee; to be debated together and brought to a conclusion within 60 minutes, with questions to be put on each motion separately; any division claimed to be taken immediately Wednesday's private members' business shall be the Second Stage of the Animal Health and Welfare (Ban on Fox Hunting) Bill 2025, selected by the Independent and Parties Technical Group.”
“Wednesday's business shall be: - Public Health (Single-Use Vapes) Bill 2025 (Second Stage) (to adjourn after 90 minutes) - Statements on Fisheries (not to exceed 3 hours and 32 minutes) - Appropriation Bill 2025 (Committee and remaining Stages) (to be taken no earlier than 7 p.m. and to conclude within 90 minutes) - Credit Review Bill 2024 (Report and Final Stages) (to conclude within 30 minutes) - Proceeds of Crime and Related Matters Bill 2025 (Report and Final Stages) (to conclude within 30 minutes) - Motion re Proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) Regulations 2025* - Motion re Proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) (No.”
“I move: Tuesday's business shall be: - Motion re Referral to Joint Committee of Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) (No. 2) Regulations 2025 (without debate and any division claimed to be taken immediately) - Motion re Appointment of Members of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (without debate and any division claimed to be taken immediately) - Motion re Ministerial Rota for Parliamentary Questions (without debate and any division claimed to be taken immediately) - Motion re Restoration of Private Members’ Bill to the Order Paper (without debate) - Motion re Report of the Committee on Standing Orders and Dáil Reform on Rota for Leaders’ Questions pursuant to Standing Order 38 (without debate and any division claimed to be taken immediately) - Appropriation Bill 2025 (Second Stage) (to conclude within 3 hours and 34 minutes and any division claimed deferred to immediately before Committee Stage on Wednesday) Tuesday's private members' business shall be the Motion re Blister Packs, selected by Sinn Féin.”
“If we were still in the situation we had when I came in in 2020, with 80, 90 or 100 children being inappropriately placed, it would be a different situation. I would be standing here feeling differently. Because such an effort has been made across all approved centres to reduce this to a situation where we have practically no child, teenager or young adolescent inappropriately placed, the right thing to do is what I am proposing. I believe this 100% in my heart of hearts. If there is a situation at 10 p.m., 11 p.m. or 12 midnight on any night of the week and a consultant has to make a choice that will result in a young person seeing the morning or not seeing the morning, the right thing to do is not to tie that clinician's hands behind their backs. I feel really strongly about this. I hope I have explained it.”
“This is not the right thing to do because when we legislate to do it, it can happen. I am trying to not legislate in order to prevent it from happening. If I were to legislate to state that if it does happen then it is okay for them to stay up to 72 hours, it would open the door. Please God, the number next year will be zero. This is what I want to see happening. At the same time, as Senators Costello and O'Reilly said, there will always be situations which are very difficult to legislate for. Something such as Storm Bram could happen and there could be a young person in a critical condition and it may not be safe to move them. Do we legislate to stop a clinician putting that child into a safe place? I do not think we can.”
“I thank the Senators again. In order to clarify, nowhere in the Bill talks about a young person being admitted to an adult ward. Nowhere in the Bill does it state a young person cannot be admitted to an adult ward. What I said earlier is that in the majority of cases I am aware of, the stay is up to a maximum of 48 hours. This is not written down anywhere. I have asked the Mental Health Commission to review the existing code of practice on such admissions in relation to the timeframe also. It would be very helpful if there were a clear code of practice on such admissions and that it would be updated. If I were to table an amendment to state that any child under the age of 18 admitted to an adult ward should be there for no more than 72 hours, then we would be legislating to do it.”
“I would prefer not to legislate for admission to adult wards, which is what it would mean to put in the timeframe. We can look at it in the secondary legislation. I will be back to the Members a lot this year in relation to what comes next when we move to the enactment of the Bill. I am sure we will discuss the UN convention again. You never know. Maybe there will be a role for it there.”
“Like everyone here, I do not want to see anybody - any young person, any adolescent - in the wrong facility. I know I am labouring the point. In nearly all instances, they are aged 17 plus and are there with the support of their families. I have not come across one yet who has been in involuntary detention. The Mental Health Commission is informed straightaway, as is the Department. We are aware of these cases, and they are monitored exceptionally closely. It is always about putting the mental health challenges of the child front and centre for that short space of time, and to have them moved on to an appropriate setting as quickly as possible. I reiterate that I have asked the Mental Health Commission to review the existing code of practice on such admissions.”
“To follow on from what the Senator said, in relation to capacity, we currently have 52 beds open. I secured the funding for 30 whole-time equivalents to reopen ten beds in Cherry Orchard next year. They were closed two and a half or three years ago because we were not able to provide safe staffing numbers. In budget 2026, I secured 300 whole-time equivalents and of those, 30 will be provided to reopen the beds in the Cherry Orchard area. I have asked the Mental Health Commission to review the existing code of practice on such admissions. I am keeping the commission busy at the moment. The code will set out protections for children and time limits for such admissions. I have asked that. It is something we can discuss for secondary legislation because the timelines would not be an issue for primary legislation.”
“That is down to community supports having improved, especially in relation to eating disorders, and the new teams we have in place. I understand exactly where both sides are coming from. I understand exactly where everyone has spoken from. However, I am not in a position to accept amendment No. 36 a .”
“A 16-year-old, with the support of his parents, did not want to move from the area he was in to Dublin, Galway or Cork. For a short time, he stayed as an inpatient, with the support of the parents and the clinicians. I do not wish to legislate for admission to adult units. That is what it would involve to put a 72-hour timeframe on it. I am afraid the numbers would go back up. In most cases, the length of stay is a maximum of 48 hours where it is justified. We use private capacity if needed. We buy private capacity to move a young person out of an adult ward. I get an update on the waiting lists for children's wards every week on a Tuesday morning. Our waiting lists are currently running at approximately one to two. We have been running under capacity nearly all of this year from an inpatient perspective.”
“It was my first time there about three months ago. We hear a lot of negativity about the cost and the length of time but, my God, it is good to actually go and see it. It has 20 en suite rooms, parents rooms and classrooms. It is spectacular. It was 95% finished, to my eyes, and the furniture was in. It has been fitted out that far, although perhaps not from a clinical perspective. That will make a significant difference as well. Senator Black referred to 72 hours. I do not want to legislate to put a child into an adult facility because we do not want it to happen. I will tell the House of an interesting case I dealt with before I was the Minister of State with responsibility for mental health. This was probably in 2016 or 2017.”
“However, as Senator O'Reilly said, in an emergency we cannot have a scenario arise whereby a child cannot access mental health services for myriad reasons. There have been two such cases this year. I have had many discussions on this. There were five admissions last year and I believe in 2020 the figure was 80 or 90. They are high numbers, which have come right down. We also know that the most appropriate place for a young person is an appropriate setting. There are inpatient units in Dublin, Cork and Galway. It is very difficult to have inpatient units for young people all over the country. People will never have that, no matter where they live. People will always have to travel. I recently visited the new mental health wing in the children's hospital and, please God, it will be open as soon as possible. It is fabulous.”
“To be very clear, the Bill does not legislate for admissions to adult units. It does not state anywhere that a child should be admitted to an adult unit. There were two rare cases this year. It must be acknowledged that both cases involved the support of parents. The young person - a teenager or adolescent – is not put into award with adults. I have to be clear about that. They are put into an individual room with one-on-one support. There is a clinical person with them at all times, with the support of their parents. The fact is that we are not legislating for admissions to adult units. The Bill does not state that if a place is not available, a child will be put into an adult unit. I would not legislate for that. I do not want to see it happen. The Bill does not enshrine that practice anywhere in law. It is not there.”
“I will come to Senator Boyhan first. In response to his discussions on the conventions, co-ordination of the conventions is the responsibility of the Minister for Children, Disability and Equality. Any review of whether the conventions should be reflected in primary legislation must be led by that Department. That is something we know for a fact. The Senator spelled out that it is not incorporated into domestic law. That is quite stark. It is something of which people may not have been aware. Every effort has been made in the Mental Health Bill 2024, as amended by the Seanad, and it puts the best interests of the child forward at every single move. On admissions to adult units, everybody wants the same thing. The best interests of the child must always be the primary consideration.”
“I do not want to see children inappropriately placed, but in all cases we are talking about involving 17-and-a-half-year-olds, there has been family support. There has not been a case where there has not been the support of the family. I explained all this to the Ombudsman for Children and all the various organisations I have met. What I have outlined is the only reason for the very few cases that have arisen. I am referring to where no other facility is available on the night in real time. I have to take cognisance of the fact that I do not want to tie the consultant's hands behind his or her back, in order to make sure a child in the circumstances we have described will see the next morning.”
“I feel really strongly about this. I spoke to a consultant in Waterford last year when there was a very serious situation in which a young person, whom I do not want to identify, had been taken from the river. I know for a fact that if the consultant had not admitted him that night to the department of psychiatry in University Hospital Waterford, he could not guarantee the family, who completely supported the decision, that the young person would be alive the next morning. The young person had told him categorically that he would go back to the River Suir. I cannot legislate for what is proposed in all good conscience; I just cannot do it. I am emotional about it and feel so strongly about it. I do not want to see the number in question anywhere else. I want to see it go down to zero.”
“He was detained overnight, with the support of his family, and moved the next day to Merlin Park. I had a similar case locally in which I engaged with the family and supported them. I believe it would be wrong to legislate to stop clinicians dealing with a situation in real time where, in what are very rare cases, a young person is a risk to themselves or others. If having spoken and thought for a long time about this matter, which I feel really strongly about, I legislated for it, I would be tying the clinicians' hands behind their backs. I have to choose life over death. If legislation were put in place and a young person were not admitted on a given night to an appropriate setting, approved for either adults or children, I could not guarantee their safety. That is the only reason I am not prepared to legislate for what is proposed.”
“A total of four of the cases were aged 17 plus and it was for a short time. To date this year, two teenagers have been admitted so far. We have to weigh it up in our minds in relation to the best action for the young person. I am thinking of the clinicians who must act in real time at 2 o'clock in the morning on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday night where a young person may have attempted suicide, for example. I remember a very specific case in Donegal a few years ago when I was Minister of State. We had a very bad storm that night and there was a young man of 17 who was very unwell. It would have been a risk to him, the ambulance staff and those who would have had to accompany him to bring him to Merlin Park in Galway that night. That was an absolute fact.”
“All admissions of young people under the age of 18 are notified to the Mental Health Commission and to a national CAMHS lead manager within the HSE mental health. On each occasion that a young person requires to be admitted to an adult unit, they are nursed on a one-to-one basis continuously over the 24-hour period as part of the commission's code of practice. The vast majority of child admissions to adult units are for those in the 16 to 17 age brackets. The HSE indicates that admission to an adult unit may often be more appropriate for the individual and to avoid any impact on younger children. Progress has been huge. Last year in 2024, there were five HSE admissions. All five admissions to an adult unit for a short space of time was with the consultation of the parents.”
“I do not have a legal background, but I state categoricallythat the Bill as a whole is compliant with the standards in relation to the issue that the Senator has raised. On Senator Black's point relating to the admission of children to adult units, I discussed this at length with the Ombudsman for Children, Mental Health Reform and various different organisations. It is something I feel extremely strongly about. When I came into this role in 2020, quite a lot of children were being admitted to adult wards for their own safety. I was not comfortable with that. Children are admitted to adult wards only after efforts to place them in a child and adolescent inpatient unit are unsuccessful due to capacity or clinical needs.”
“The Bill provides a balanced approach to the provision of mental health treatment, enshrining the best interests of the child as the primary consideration in all decisions. I understand where the Senators are coming from, but I have to act on the advice that has been given to me. We took this seriously since it was raised last week. We have looked at this and got advice from the Attorney General on this. I reiterate that neither convention have been incorporated into domestic law in Ireland. Notwithstanding that, there has been a huge effort across all the work that has gone into this Bill. When it is considered that this Bill was moved at Second Stage in the Dáil in September 2024 and now I am here in December 2025, there has been a huge amount of time, effort and toing and froing legally to make sure it is sound.”
“Significant effort has gone into each and every section - all 220 of them - ensuring that the best interest of the child is upheld and where there is an infringement on a child's rights that such infringements are subject to stringent legal safeguards. With all our discussions and new amendments in relation to being compliant with the Child Care Act, justice Act and Family Courts Act 2024, providing for the family-friendly courts, we had to make sure that with every official working on the Bill with the Attorney General and the Office of Parliamentary Counsel that in every section that the best interests of the child are upheld. That was paramount across everything that was done.”