Bailing out child

Muir · 27-08-2012 12:25am #1

Basically a family member is having awful trouble with their 16 year old and had them formally charged today. This family member was then told they had to go bail out the child. Legally, do they have to bail out the child as they are the legal guardian or can they refuse?
Thanks.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 1:08am

Muir wrote: »

Basically a family member is having awful trouble with their 16 year old and had them formally charged today. This family member was then told they had to go bail out the child. Legally, do they have to bail out the child as they are the legal guardian or can they refuse?
Thanks.

Sorry but no matter how much of a Cnut your own child is who lets the child at 16 be left in custody because they won't go bail. (I took out the politically incorrect statement) Take responsibility for their child and go bail then deal with the issues causing the problems.

johnnyskeleton · 27-08-2012 1:23am

ResearchWill wrote: »

Muir wrote: »

Basically a family member is having awful trouble with their 16 year old and had them formally charged today. This family member was then told they had to go bail out the child. Legally, do they have to bail out the child as they are the legal guardian or can they refuse?
Thanks.

Sorry but no matter how much of a Cnut your own child is who lets the child at 16 be left in custody because they won't go bail. (I took out the politically incorrect statement) Take responsibility for their child and go bail then deal with the issues causing the problems.

It isn't really all that simple if the bail surety is significant and the person knows that the child will not comply with the terms of bail. What if the child is charged with committing violent or sexual offences against the parent or a sibling? Sometimes too a bit of tough love is required.

So I understand why a parent wouldn't, in some circumstances, agree to act as surety.

A person cannot be forced to enter a recognisance before a judge, nor I would imagine could a failure to act as surety be considered neglect. However, it would make sense that the parent turn up in court and explain their position rather than simply being a no show.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 1:34am

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

It isn't really all that simple if the bail surety is significant and the person knows that the child will not comply with the terms of bail. What if the child is charged with committing violent or sexual offences against the parent or a sibling? Sometimes too a bit of tough love is required.

So I understand why a parent wouldn't, in some circumstances, agree to act as surety.

A person cannot be forced to enter a recognisance before a judge, nor I would imagine could a failure to act as surety be considered neglect. However, it would make sense that the parent turn up in court and explain their position rather than simply being a no show.

If the charge was sexual assault or worse against a family member there would be no way that any condition of the child residing in the same house would be imposed. No where in the OP was it stated that the patent did not believe the child would not comply with any conditions of bail. If that was a reason then that may be a valid reason to refuse to go surety.

But sending a 16 year old to prison never ends well, and is usually the start of a number of years of repeat offending.

BTW as the OP said the parent had the child formaly charged today, I am assuming as its a Sunday in August the bail been spoken of is station Bail which would lead me to believe that AGS are reasonably happy to bail the child, as any other bail would wait till a emergency sitting in the morning.

MagicSean · 27-08-2012 8:27am

ResearchWill wrote: »

Sorry but no matter how much of a Cnut your own child is who lets the child at 16 be left in custody because they won't go bail. (I took out the politically incorrect statement) Take responsibility for their child and go bail then deal with the issues causing the problems.

Cop on to yourself, you obviously have little experience with how bad things can get for some parents. There are some horrible evil little bastards out there who are still under that age of 18. The fact that this guy was not eligible for the juvenile diversion program at 16 and was charged by his own family should give you a clue as to what he is like. Some of the things some parents have to deal with would be Garda raids, death threats, criminal damage to your home, assaults on you by your own child or his "friends", constant verbal abuse, thefts not to mention the shame and embarassment it brings. You comment is disgracefully misinformed to be honest.

And no op, you can't be forced to bail out your own child.

ResearchWill wrote: »

If the charge was sexual assault or worse against a family member there would be no way that any condition of the child residing in the same house would be imposed. No where in the OP was it stated that the patent did not believe the child would not comply with any conditions of bail. If that was a reason then that may be a valid reason to refuse to go surety.

But sending a 16 year old to prison never ends well, and is usually the start of a number of years of repeat offending.

BTW as the OP said the parent had the child formaly charged today, I am assuming as its a Sunday in August the bail been spoken of is station Bail which would lead me to believe that AGS are reasonably happy to bail the child, as any other bail would wait till a emergency sitting in the morning.

AGS can really only restrict bail in limited circumstances. Unless there was a breach of a court order or an imminent threat to life then it is unlikely bail would be refused in a station.

Muir · 27-08-2012 9:44am

Thanks for the replies. I didn't think they had to but they were being told they did (& afraid of getting into trouble if they say no). The family member is always very compliant with what they are told to do (this is the first time they were formally charged but it's at the stage that the family member has had to deal with AGS on a very regular basis).

It's not a case of one incident and no one wants to deal with it. The parent does take responsibility that maybe they haven't done everything right & is in parenting classes & counselling. It's over two year of things increasingly getting worse. I could sit here all day writing a list of the reasons the parent wouldn't want to bail the child out. The short version is that this child is a danger to parent & siblings.

& I do get where you are coming from ResearchWill, before having to deal with this the parent would have said the exact same thing as yourself. But it's very different when you end up in this situation.

Thanks for the replies everyone!

johnnyskeleton · 27-08-2012 11:30am

ResearchWill wrote: »

If the charge was sexual assault or worse against a family member there would be no way that any condition of the child residing in the same house would be imposed. No where in the OP was it stated that the patent did not believe the child would not comply with any conditions of bail. If that was a reason then that may be a valid reason to refuse to go surety.

Precicely because the OP didn't state their reasons we don't know why the parent is reluctant to enter the recog. Nor do we know the terms of bail and what the sticking point is. I don't think it is fair to assume the worst when the OP clearly feels that there is some reason why the parent would not want to bail out the child. Several reasons readily come to mind as to why this is so.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 1:38pm

MagicSean wrote: »

Cop on to yourself, you obviously have little experience with how bad things can get for some parents. There are some horrible evil little bastards out there who are still under that age of 18. The fact that this guy was not eligible for the juvenile diversion program at 16 and was charged by his own family should give you a clue as to what he is like. Some of the things some parents have to deal with would be Garda raids, death threats, criminal damage to your home, assaults on you by your own child or his "friends", constant verbal abuse, thefts not to mention the shame and embarassment it brings. You comment is disgracefully misinformed to be honest.

And no op, you can't be forced to bail out your own child.

AGS can really only restrict bail in limited circumstances. Unless there was a breach of a court order or an imminent threat to life then it is unlikely bail would be refused in a station.

Well I won't cop on. I have plenty of experience of this I work In Criminal Law, I have never seen this way of dealing with the issues in the family working. The problem is usually drink or drugs and the child usually does what he does because of serious issues which are not fixed by locking the child up in prison. In fact the main problem is that after a few weeks inside the child thinks this is not so bad I'm not put out by prison, then prison hanging over the head of the child has no effect.

This problem has according to the OP being coming for 2 years, I don't know what they did in the past, but if it's like most people in this situation more than likely they did not do the right things. Now it has come to a head, the criminal justice and social welfare system have become involved, the child will be put in custody and any hope of reconciliation are reduced with each day in custody, this child going by the stats is now looking at spending a large part of the next 10 years or more in the criminal justice system, my belief is there are better ways and I having being involved with some of these cases can tell you prison does not work.

A Primal Nut · 27-08-2012 1:42pm

ResearchWill wrote: »

Well I won't cop on. I have plenty of experience of this I work In Criminal Law, I have never seen this way of dealing with the issues in the family working. The problem is usually drink or drugs and the child usually does what he does because of serious issues which are not fixed by locking the child up in prison. In fact the main problem is that after a few weeks inside the child thinks this is not so bad I'm not put out by prison, then prison hanging over the head of the child has no effect.

This problem has according to the OP being coming for 2 years, I don't know what they did in the past, but if it's like most people in this situation more than likely they did not do the right things. Now it has come to a head, the criminal justice and social welfare system have become involved, the child will be put in custody and any hope of reconciliation are reduced with each day in custody, this child going by the stats is now looking at spending a large part of the next 10 years or more in the criminal justice system, my belief is there are better ways and I having being involved with some of these cases can tell you prison does not work.

He can't commit a crime while he in prison - that's as good a reason as any. At the end of the day it's his decision whether he allows himself to be rehabilitated or spend a large part of the next 10 years in the criminal justice system.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 1:47pm

A Primal Nut wrote: »

He can't commit a crime while he in prison - that's as good a reason as any. At the end of the day it's his decision whether he allows himself to be rehabilitated or spend a large part of the next 10 years in the criminal justice system.

Yes he can, drugs crime, assault on prison officer or other prisoner while a peron can not commit a crime against the general public he can still commit a crime.

My point is that by dealing with the matter this way there is almost a guarantee that this child will go down the wrong road, that costs you and me money, a multi disciplinary approach taking the child out of the family to a supporting environment and protecting the family can be done without prison. It's cheaper both short and long term.

MagicSean · 27-08-2012 2:12pm

ResearchWill wrote: »

Well I won't cop on. I have plenty of experience of this I work In Criminal Law,

I've no doubt you have experience in criminal law but unless you attend the homes of your clients in the middle of domestics you don't have the experience required to make the comments you made.

ResearchWill wrote: »

I have never seen this way of dealing with the issues in the family working. The problem is usually drink or drugs and the child usually does what he does because of serious issues which are not fixed by locking the child up in prison. In fact the main problem is that after a few weeks inside the child thinks this is not so bad I'm not put out by prison, then prison hanging over the head of the child has no effect.

I've seen quite a few situations were children have been given up to the HSE by parents because they are no longer capable of dealing with them. And I'm not talking about bad parents. Similarly I have seen parents allow do like the op and stop protecting them from the consequences of their actions and let them face the music. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

ResearchWill wrote: »

This problem has according to the OP being coming for 2 years, I don't know what they did in the past, but if it's like most people in this situation more than likely they did not do the right things. Now it has come to a head, the criminal justice and social welfare system have become involved, the child will be put in custody and any hope of reconciliation are reduced with each day in custody, this child going by the stats is now looking at spending a large part of the next 10 years or more in the criminal justice system, my belief is there are better ways and I having being involved with some of these cases can tell you prison does not work.

Wow. The right things? Perhaps you could suggest what the right things are? I would be very interested to know.

Muir · 27-08-2012 2:21pm

ResearchWill - can you suggest some ideas of what might help the child then? Honestly if there's something that we haven't tried we would be delighted to hear about it and try it. What sort of supporting environment do you mean? I do understand where you're coming from, but we are at a loss of things to do so if you can offer anything it'll be looked into. Thanks.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 2:23pm

MagicSean wrote: »

I've no doubt you have experience in criminal law but unless you attend the homes of your clients in the middle of domestics you don't have the experience required to make the comments you made.

I've seen quite a few situations were children have been given up to the HSE by parents because they are no longer capable of dealing with them. And I'm not talking about bad parents. Similarly I have seen parents allow do like the op and stop protecting them from the consequences of their actions and let them face the music. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

Wow. The right things? Perhaps you could suggest what the right things are? I would be very interested to know.

No i dont have to go to the house I have to deal with the aftermath. Getting the HSE involved early is a good idea, and yes some times it is of course necessary to have a child or adult taken out of the home, but not into prison.

The right thing is to try and get the help the family need before it is a prison situation. The OP said this has been going on for 2 years, that is what I have seen over and over, the problem brews in the background, for what ever reason its left to brew untill its a really serious problem. My point is that prison will not fix this problem, maybe something else wont either, but at least the child will not be any further damaged. The right ting is to get to the route of the problem, I have seen so many young lives wasted, because simply noone diagnosed a serious mental issues. in many cases I have come across the abuse of drink and drugs is little more than self medication. Most mothers and fathers in this situation will repeat the mantra "but he is really a good boy", but ignoring the problem untill the only option seems to be prison is failure on everyones part.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 2:27pm

Muir wrote: »

ResearchWill - can you suggest some ideas of what might help the child then? Honestly if there's something that we haven't tried we would be delighted to hear about it and try it. What sort of supporting environment do you mean? I do understand where you're coming from, but we are at a loss of things to do so if you can offer anything it'll be looked into. Thanks.

Does the child have a social worker? has the child been assesed for any one of a number of mental issues? Is there a multi disiplinary task force involved?

haulagebasher · 27-08-2012 2:36pm

I've just checked with someone and there is no obligation for anybody (incl parents) to put up bail. IMO a night in the slammer might do a wayward "bright boy" some good an hopefully he will straighten out his act and learn his lessons. My cousin (fathers side) was a local "hard boy" and a visit from the guards set him straight.Jsut for background info what were the circumstances. Was he violent? Is drink or drugs involved? Was it sexual offences - If so this needs to be checked and he may need to be placed in treatment.

Muir · 27-08-2012 2:43pm

Yes, they have a social worker. The child doesn't want to engage with it and my boyfriend has sat down with the child and explained that the social worker works with them, if they aren't happy they can ask for a new one and they can ring up and arrange a meeting etc. to try and get the child to maybe see it as something they can take control of instead of something they are being forced to do, although so far this hasn't worked.

The child has ADHD but refuses to take medication. Has been to a counselor and a psychologist, but again will not really engage with these things, doesn't want to be there, and I think the psychologist has reduced sessions because of this.

They have also had JLOs, and more recently they have been assigned a special member of AGS (I'm not sure what this is actually called but it's a step up from a JLO) and the garda regularly calls to see how things are etc.

So there are a number of people involved trying to help.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 2:54pm

Muir wrote: »

Yes, they have a social worker. The child doesn't want to engage with it and my boyfriend has sat down with the child and explained that the social worker works with them, if they aren't happy they can ask for a new one and they can ring up and arrange a meeting etc. to try and get the child to maybe see it as something they can take control of instead of something they are being forced to do, although so far this hasn't worked.

The child has ADHD but refuses to take medication. Has been to a counselor and a psychologist, but again will not really engage with these things, doesn't want to be there, and I think the psychologist has reduced sessions because of this.

They have also had JLOs, and more recently they have been assigned a special member of AGS (I'm not sure what this is actually called but it's a step up from a JLO) and the garda regularly calls to see how things are etc.

So there are a number of people involved trying to help.

I dont mean to get involved in your life, but you did come on this forum. I assume as you say your boyfriend has spoken to the child the child is yours. And your boyfriend is not his father.

I dont really want or think this should be discussed any further if the above assumptions I have made are correct.

I will just restate in the situation you have set out, a 16 year old with diganosed ADHD, who refuses to take medication and refuses to engage with social work and medical profesionals requires prison time, I really can not agree with that, maybe a sharp shock of a day in the local nick but not months

haulagebasher · 27-08-2012 3:03pm

If the boy isn't taking his medication shurly there is some protocol is in place where the medication can be administered in the form of a slow release implant or an intramuscular injection. I recall something about psychosurgery or neurosurgery being used to treat patients with ADHD. It might be something worth talking about with your GP or the HSE. It has been found to be particularly effective with addiction and it works by using a heated wire to destroy by heating the parts of the brain that causes additions and peculiar sexual habits. It causes side effects, but given the (possible) occurance of sexually aggravated offences against siblings, it may be for the best. It would also serve as a good precautionary measure to prevent him from committing such offences in the future.

Muir · 27-08-2012 3:11pm

haulagebasher - thanks for that. As I said above, I'd be here all day listing all the things, but I suppose the pressing issue is that this child is violent and a danger to the safety of other family member.s

ResearchWill - The child isn't mine, I'm not old enough to have a 16 year old! They live very nearby & I would say I am fairly involved, I tend to be the listening ear etc. My boyfriend got into a bit of trouble himself when he was young & stupid so he tries to understand it from the childs perspective whereas the rest of us maybe don't see that perspective so much.

I'm not saying they should get months in prison or anything, a night in a cell might scare them, I don't know, but currently they are fearless.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 3:15pm

Muir wrote: »

haulagebasher - thanks for that. As I said above, I'd be here all day listing all the things, but I suppose the pressing issue is that this child is violent and a danger to the safety of other family member.s

ResearchWill - The child isn't mine, I'm not old enough to have a 16 year old! They live very nearby & I would say I am fairly involved, I tend to be the listening ear etc. My boyfriend got into a bit of trouble himself when he was young & stupid so he tries to understand it from the childs perspective whereas the rest of us maybe don't see that perspective so much.

I'm not saying they should get months in prison or anything, a night in a cell might scare them, I don't know, but currently they are fearless.

I am sorry for my assumptions, but I did say I assumed, I would rather err on the side of caution.

It seems this is a very troubled child who has ADHD and is more than likely very scared. If his family dont go bail then untill someone does and more than likely it will have to be the parents, this child will remain in custody untill the case is heard.

I really think going that far when a child who is obviously ADHD and non medicating is not the solution. But at the end of the day the parents and this child are the ones who have to live with that decision.

Muir · 27-08-2012 3:29pm

ResearchWill wrote: »

I am sorry for my assumptions, but I did say I assumed, I would rather err on the side of caution.

It seems this is a very troubled child who has ADHD and is more than likely very scared. If his family dont go bail then untill someone does and more than likely it will have to be the parents, this child will remain in custody untill the case is heard.

I really think going that far when a child who is obviously ADHD and non medicating is not the solution. But at the end of the day the parents and this child are the ones who have to live with that decision.

That's grand. Thanks for the input.

johnnyskeleton · 27-08-2012 3:50pm

ResearchWill wrote:

I will just restate in the situation you have set out, a 16 year old with diganosed ADHD, who refuses to take medication and refuses to engage with social work and medical profesionals requires prison time, I really can not agree with that, maybe a sharp shock of a day in the local nick but not months

The question of remanding a person in custody or not is nothing to do with the person's problems and how to solve them, it is to ensure that they will turn up for court and not interfere with the course of justice or commit further serious offences. If convicted, again it is not about helping the child but balancing any liklihood of rehabilitation against the need to prevent them committing further crime and to punish them.

Nowhere has the OP said what the child is charged with etc and it is perhaps not appropriate that that be gone into in this instance. The issue is whether the parents have to act as bailsperson to the child and if they refuse to do so, while they won't be winning any parent of the year competitions, I don't necessarily think they are doing something by that.

Also, it might be of benefit to you to have a bit of perspective. What happens in court is often a cleaned up version of what happens in reality. I know from other posts that MagicSean and others appear to have significant experience of the criminal justice system and this is an anonymous forum so you do not have a monopoly of experience in this area.

ResearchWill wrote: »

It seems this is a very troubled child who has ADHD and is more than likely very scared. If his family dont go bail then untill someone does and more than likely it will have to be the parents, this child will remain in custody untill the case is heard.

Well no, that's not the law. To set bail at a level that the person cannot enter into is an effective refusal of bail. So if the child has no money and there is evidence that the parents will not act as surety etc then that is tantamount to refusal of bail. It doesn't mean that the child can't be remanded in custody, but the judge will have to be made aware of same and/or the gardai may agree to an own bond in such circumstances.

mirwillbeback · 27-08-2012 3:54pm

ResearchWill wrote: »

Well I won't cop on. I have plenty of experience of this I work In Criminal Law, I have never seen this way of dealing with the issues in the family working. The problem is usually drink or drugs and the child usually does what he does because of serious issues which are not fixed by locking the child up in prison. In fact the main problem is that after a few weeks inside the child thinks this is not so bad I'm not put out by prison, then prison hanging over the head of the child has no effect.

This problem has according to the OP being coming for 2 years, I don't know what they did in the past, but if it's like most people in this situation more than likely they did not do the right things. Now it has come to a head, the criminal justice and social welfare system have become involved, the child will be put in custody and any hope of reconciliation are reduced with each day in custody, this child going by the stats is now looking at spending a large part of the next 10 years or more in the criminal justice system, my belief is there are better ways and I having being involved with some of these cases can tell you prison does not work.

You work in Criminal Law? Lord help us if these are the views you are bringing to the industry.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 4:01pm

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

The question of remanding a person in custody or not is nothing to do with the person's problems and how to solve them, it is to ensure that they will turn up for court and not interfere with the course of justice or commit further serious offences. If convicted, again it is not about helping the child but balancing any liklihood of rehabilitation against the need to prevent them committing further crime and to punish them.

Nowhere has the OP said what the child is charged with etc and it is perhaps not appropriate that that be gone into in this instance. The issue is whether the parents have to act as bailsperson to the child and if they refuse to do so, while they won't be winning any parent of the year competitions, I don't necessarily think they are doing something by that.

Also, it might be of benefit to you to have a bit of perspective. What happens in court is often a cleaned up version of what happens in reality. I know from other posts that MagicSean and others appear to have significant experience of the criminal justice system and this is an anonymous forum so you do not have a monopoly of experience in this area.

Well no, that's not the law. To set bail at a level that the person cannot enter into is an effective refusal of bail. So if the child has no money and there is evidence that the parents will not act as surety etc then that is tantamount to refusal of bail. It doesn't mean that the child can't be remanded in custody, but the judge will have to be made aware of same and/or the gardai may agree to an own bond in such circumstances.

I believe I have a bit of perspective, before the OP stated ADHD, I said more than likely ADHD or mental illness. I said more than likley the matter festered for 2 years, well OP has stated that this child has refused to engage and take medication. So then after two years how has the family reacted they have reported the child and wish to refuse to go bail.

Now if the family refuse to go independent surerty and no one elses does then a court may be asked and may say no he is 16, charges are x so independent surety is needed, then the High Court may agree. So there is a very good chance this child will be remanded in custody.

I feel that what I first said has been borne out by the facts of the case as outlined by the OP, I do not think the Criminal Justice System is where this child should be, maybe there are issues here for the mental health acts or some other intervention but I really dont think the Criminal Justice System is in this case any solution.

You have to ask your self why did I think mental illness or ADHD straight away, because in the vast majority of cases its exactly that, I have seen way to many guys in their late 20's who have wasted 10 - 20 years of their young lives in a system not set up to solve any of their problems.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 4:02pm

mirwillbeback wrote: »

You work in Criminal Law? Lord help us if these are the views you are bringing to the industry.

Yes and I dont think it should be used to try and sort out a 16 year old with ADHD, why do you think it should. What view do you take offence at, is it the one that says a child of 16 should not be thrown on the scrap heap. Is it the one that says throwing a child in jail with out getting to the real problem is no solution, which one exactly.

Muir · 27-08-2012 4:27pm

You can't use ADHD as an excuse to do what you like either though. I mean the child used to take the medication, they were still out breaking into people's homes etc. I will add, the child was bailed out by the parent last night, because the parent was basically being told they could not refuse to bail the child out, which I didn't think could be true.

Loads of people have mental illness or some other problem. It can't be used as an excuse to go off doing whatever the hell you like, particularly if you're unwilling to use any of the help being offered to you. It's an extreme situation where children & the parent are being physically hurt. Frankly we are surprised the younger children haven't been taken into care due to the severity of the situation.

There is help for the 16 year old should they decide to take advantage of it. They've been offered anger management as opposed to having charges against them and said no. There's a psychologist willing to see the child if the child wants to make use of it. Everything anyone can think of to make available to help the child has been, they aren't interested. There isn't any tiny ounce of the child willing or wanting to make any effort on their part to resolve the situation. So as far as I'm concerned in that sense you can't just use ADHD as an excuse for it.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 4:35pm

Muir wrote: »

You can't use ADHD as an excuse to do what you like either though. I mean the child used to take the medication, they were still out breaking into people's homes etc. I will add, the child was bailed out by the parent last night, because the parent was basically being told they could not refuse to bail the child out, which I didn't think could be true.

Loads of people have mental illness or some other problem. It can't be used as an excuse to go off doing whatever the hell you like, particularly if you're unwilling to use any of the help being offered to you. It's an extreme situation where children & the parent are being physically hurt. Frankly we are surprised the younger children haven't been taken into care due to the severity of the situation.

There is help for the 16 year old should they decide to take advantage of it. They've been offered anger management as opposed to having charges against them and said no. There's a psychologist willing to see the child if the child wants to make use of it. Everything anyone can think of to make available to help the child has been, they aren't interested. There isn't any tiny ounce of the child willing or wanting to make any effort on their part to resolve the situation. So as far as I'm concerned in that sense you can't just use ADHD as an excuse for it.

Just so there is no doubt I don't think it should be used as an excuse. I just don't believe that the criminal justice system will be the solution. Yes I know this family are at the end of their tether, yes this kid is a total scut, yes the family have done their very best.

My point is there must be a better way than involving the criminal justice system. I can with relative certanity predict how the next 10 to 20 years will go for this family. I really hope I'm wrong.

To the OP all you can keep doing with your boyfriend is support this family. Leave no stone unturned have the family try their best to keep this child out of the system.

johnnyskeleton · 27-08-2012 4:40pm

ResearchWill wrote: »

I believe I have a bit of perspective, before the OP stated ADHD, I said more than likely ADHD or mental illness. I said more than likley the matter festered for 2 years, well OP has stated that this child has refused to engage and take medication. So then after two years how has the family reacted they have reported the child and wish to refuse to go bail.

In which post did you say these things before the OP? You said drink drugs or other mental problems from what I can see. The OP mentioned two years in post 6 and I don't see you mentioning this before that.

But supposing it is true, what does that mean? Well, either you suggested these things to the OP which the OP went along with, or you made a guess that turned out correctly. Even if you did predict that a person had been suffering from ADHD for 2 years previously that does not give you any special insight into the criminal justice system.

ResearchWill wrote: »

Now if the family refuse to go independent surerty and no one elses does then a court may be asked and may say no he is 16, charges are x so independent surety is needed, then the High Court may agree. So there is a very good chance this child will be remanded in custody.

You can't assess that chance. It is possible, as I said, but to do so in circumstances where the judge is aware that no independent surety is available means that the Court will have to assess it on the basis that it is tantamount to refusal of bail.

ResearchWill wrote: »

I feel that what I first said has been borne out by the facts of the case as outlined by the OP, I do not think the Criminal Justice System is where this child should be, maybe there are issues here for the mental health acts or some other intervention but I really dont think the Criminal Justice System is in this case any solution.

In fairness, you simply don't have enough information to comment really. What if he is charged with rape or manslaughter?

ResearchWill wrote: »

You have to ask your self why did I think mental illness or ADHD straight away, because in the vast majority of cases its exactly that, I have seen way to many guys in their late 20's who have wasted 10 - 20 years of their young lives in a system not set up to solve any of their problems.

What you said was:

"The problem is usually drink or drugs and the child usually does what he does because of serious issues which are not fixed by locking the child up in prison"

Which is not exactly an original answer because most of the time one of the above three factors will feature in any crime.

But let's also be clear about one thing - it is a function of the State to provide health care and assistance to people in such circumstances. If they refuse to accept such assistance then the criminal justice system very much has a role in preventing them from hurting others. That is not to say that I am unsympathetic to people who suffer from mental illness or addiction problems who end up in a life of crime, but really to suggest that the criminal justice system cannot have a role in dealing with people who commit crimes is preposterous. To avoid any punishment one need only waive a doctors cert or drugs analysis and you can do whatever you want with impunity. Other, law abiding citizens must stand idly by as you rape and pillage your way across the country because those with mental ilnesses are immune from punishment. Is that what you are advocating?

You may say that the root cause of these crimes is drink or mental illness or whatever, with free will a distant second, but it is equally valid to say that of all the tens of thousands of people with mental health and addiction issues, only a small fraction commit crimes. Therefore, from my point of view, there is a free will choice at the heart of every crime, and while a person with mental health problems may not be in command of their actions as much as someone else, they are not an automaton either, especially if they have been offered plenty support and treatment but have refused same. If they didn't choose to commit the crime directly of their own free well, they refused to accept treatment of their own free will. Either way, they are responsible for their own actions.

haulagebasher · 27-08-2012 4:44pm

If the child is refusing all reasonable attempts to help and offers of treatment, and bearing in mind my last post, do you think that there would be a viable case in arguing that they are not of sound mind and thus are incapable of making decisions regarding medical treatment. If this could be sucessfully argued well then it would be possible to have the boy taken into care regardless of his protests. That way he can have the treatments, medication can be administered in a controleld way and surgery can be used to treat the cause of the sexual violence directed against the family. Pesonally, I think this would result in the best outcome although I would caution that neurosurgery carries risk of side effects.
If the family really are at the end of their tether with this, this avenue also provides a reasonably long term prospect of having the child committed to long term care facility where he can recieve medication and treatment. FWIW it is better for him (and the family) to be in long term institutional care rather than be done for rape or worse and end up in a prison, which is a perfect environment for the furtherence of vice and criminality.

Muir · 27-08-2012 4:45pm

What other options are there though? All other options are being exhausted. Although you mentioned the mental health act earlier, I know the social worker will be speaking to me soon about things I think might help & I think possibly sectioning him & really doing a proper evaluation of his mental health might be a good idea.

With ADHD I understand aggressive outbursts to an extent, but there have also been cases of planned attacks on family members in their sleep. That to me is cold and calculated, not impulsive as you would expect with ADHD. So I don't even think that's the only factor.

Muir · 27-08-2012 4:50pm

haulagebasher wrote: »

If the child is refusing all reasonable attempts to help and offers of treatment, and bearing in mind my last post, do you think that there would be a viable case in arguing that they are not of sound mind and thus are incapable of making decisions regarding medical treatment. If this could be sucessfully argued well then it would be possible to have the boy taken into care regardless of his protests. That way he can have the treatments, medication can be administered in a controleld way and surgery can be used to treat the cause of the sexual violence directed against the family. Pesonally, I think this would result in the best outcome although I would caution that neurosurgery carries risk of side effects.

It's not sexual.
I do understand that point & I will suggest it to the social worker.

haulagebasher · 27-08-2012 5:00pm

With ADHD I understand aggressive outbursts to an extent, but there have also been cases of planned attacks on family members in their sleep. That to me is cold and calculated, not impulsive as you would expect with ADHD. So I don't even think that's the only factor.

On that basis alone, for the sake of avoiding serious injury or death, I would say that the patient be removed from the home and sectioned. Given the grave circumstances, I would be approaching the HSE and notifying the Gardai and pleading extraordinary circumstances to have him committed to long term care. Having attempts made on your life while you are sleeping is an extreme case. TBH action should have been taken long before it has come to the stage where you cannot go to sleep for fear of being killed. This has revealed a whole new level of seriousness which is quite frightening. I hope something is organised ASAP. If there is long term difficulty in ensuring he medicates, I would say psychosurgery would offer an effective mode of adabitng the sexually violent behaviours. Serious side effects must take second place now since the acts have been revealed to be so serious. There is a HUGE difference between breaking into peoples houses and making an attempt on a sleeping persons life.
Another avenue of medical treatment parralell to the ADHD meds/surgery would be to have the medical team consider the use of Provera, which can substatially reduce the drive of sexually motivated offenders by interrupting hormones. It also causes a reduction in physical strength by preventing muscle growth. It may be particularly effective in controlling a 16 year old as they are going through puberty and it will block development of physical strength characteristics. A very effective treatment for safety concerns IMHO. It is used a lot in prisons in the USA.
________________________________________________________
EDIT: No sexual motivation - duly noted.

MagicSean · 27-08-2012 5:11pm

haulagebasher wrote: »

If the child is refusing all reasonable attempts to help and offers of treatment, and bearing in mind my last post, do you think that there would be a viable case in arguing that they are not of sound mind and thus are incapable of making decisions regarding medical treatment.

He could just be an asshole. Why do people always look for some underlying cause. Can you not accept that some people are just bad?

haulagebasher · 27-08-2012 5:22pm

^^TBH I don't accept "being an asshole" as being a sufficient analysis of the problem. Even if he is "an asshole" something caused him to be this way and as a treatment, or damage limitation at least, for his safety and the safety of family adequate treatment must be secured. It is very difficult to get a person into a long term care institution but once they are in they are there in a controlled environment where meds/surgery can be administered as required. Now, I know the OP has revealed that the violence was non-sexual in nature but it has been carried out in the past where Provera has been administered as a preventative measure just in case sexually based violence were to develop. Certainly, int the case of long term care institutions it has been known to develop in previously non-sexually violent patients.Now when we have a situation where a patient will not accept medication, we have implants but these only last for so long before needing to be replaced. Given that he could be released or could flee care, psychosurgery really does provide the most reliable solution in such instances. I'm not sure if it's practiced here but it certainly is available in the mainland UK - the NTPF may be an option. One particularly interesting procedure which I have studies in the last few years is the Bilateral cingulotomy wherein the supra callosum fibres are obliterated which in many cases resulted in transforming practically uncontrollably violent patients into remarkably placid individuals. One side effect that occured in a number of the patients though was that they became entirely unmotivated and incapable of taking the initiative to completeing the most basic tasks, despite maintaining all of the higher facualties wholly intact. For instance they would have to be prompted to do basic things like get up or eat a meal. They would also have been capable of carrying out complex mental tasks such as algebraic calculations if they were prompted to do so (assuming of course that they were capable of such before the surgery). That particular patient was a former avionics engineer before becoming ill. A facinating subject by all accounts.

I do note that it is currently non-sexual but preventative measures such as this have been used in the past and have been (still are) quite effective.

Muir · 27-08-2012 6:05pm

The parent heard from the social worker a while ago. They are attempting to get the child a placement, although it'll be difficult as they can't be placed with other children. But hopefully that might help.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 7:01pm

Muir wrote: »

The parent heard from the social worker a while ago. They are attempting to get the child a placement, although it'll be difficult as they can't be placed with other children. But hopefully that might help.

Good, to see it going down this road, it won't be easy and will be a long road, maybe this event has brought the issues to ahead. But I really think all these avenues be exhausted before throwing in the towel.

MagicSean · 27-08-2012 7:50pm

ResearchWill wrote: »

Good, to see it going down this road, it won't be easy and will be a long road, maybe this event has brought the issues to ahead. But I really think all these avenues be exhausted before throwing in the towel.

I think it's the same road. Sounds like the child is being placed into the care of the HSE as he wasn't bailed.

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 8:40pm

MagicSean wrote: »

I think it's the same road. Sounds like the child is being placed into the care of the HSE as he wasn't bailed.

A previous post from the OP "I will add, the child was bailed out by the parent last night,"

So last night the child was bailed. While this child may very well end up on the road. While care is not ideal there it is better than St. Pats. There are specialist units in the UK with very good success rates any chance is better than no chance.

MagicSean · 27-08-2012 9:31pm

ResearchWill wrote: »

A previous post from the OP "I will add, the child was bailed out by the parent last night,"

So last night the child was bailed. While this child may very well end up on the road. While care is not ideal there it is better than St. Pats. There are specialist units in the UK with very good success rates any chance is better than no chance.

Isn't Pats closed?

ResearchWill · 27-08-2012 9:52pm

MagicSean wrote: »

Isn't Pats closed?

As far as I know it's still open, but 16 to 17 year olds are going to oberstown. I believe St Pats will be fully closed in 2015 I think with all children detained in Oberstown in one of the 3 detention schools.

Sorry for saying he would be detained in st Pats habit.

biddybops · 27-08-2012 11:16pm

haulagebasher wrote: »

^^TBH I don't accept "being an asshole" as being a sufficient analysis of the problem. Even if he is "an asshole" something caused him to be this way and as a treatment, or damage limitation at least, for his safety and the safety of family adequate treatment must be secured. It is very difficult to get a person into a long term care institution but once they are in they are there in a controlled environment where meds/surgery can be administered as required. Now, I know the OP has revealed that the violence was non-sexual in nature but it has been carried out in the past where Provera has been administered as a preventative measure just in case sexually based violence were to develop. Certainly, int the case of long term care institutions it has been known to develop in previously non-sexually violent patients.Now when we have a situation where a patient will not accept medication, we have implants but these only last for so long before needing to be replaced. Given that he could be released or could flee care, psychosurgery really does provide the most reliable solution in such instances. I'm not sure if it's practiced here but it certainly is available in the mainland UK - the NTPF may be an option. One particularly interesting procedure which I have studies in the last few years is the Bilateral cingulotomy wherein the supra callosum fibres are obliterated which in many cases resulted in transforming practically uncontrollably violent patients into remarkably placid individuals. One side effect that occured in a number of the patients though was that they became entirely unmotivated and incapable of taking the initiative to completeing the most basic tasks, despite maintaining all of the higher facualties wholly intact. For instance they would have to be prompted to do basic things like get up or eat a meal. They would also have been capable of carrying out complex mental tasks such as algebraic calculations if they were prompted to do so (assuming of course that they were capable of such before the surgery). That particular patient was a former avionics engineer before becoming ill. A facinating subject by all accounts.

I do note that it is currently non-sexual but preventative measures such as this have been used in the past and have been (still are) quite effective.

Jesus wept.
Are you for real?

Bailing out child

Comments