I thank Deputy Gogarty for the opportunity to address this most serious issue. I thank the Minister for the pending reforms of the family court system. It is overdue and most welcome. I commend Anna Kavanagh and Dr. Finbar Markey who have done tremendous work, both supporting and documenting the plight of parents trying to navigate a complex and oftentimes inhumane system. I am sorry I missed the other contributions this morning. I am bilocating with the Joint Committee on Disability Matters. Following on from Deputy Gibney in relation to the fiscal resourcing, what is critical to all of this is a resource of empathy. That will boil down to the recruitment and possibly the relocation of personnel with empathetic skills par excellence in this most complex area. It is not enough to add trauma on top of trauma. The starting point is the child-centred piece. I refer to four Ps - prioritising the person over procedure and the person not to be a pawn. To this end, I must flag the most serious issue of safeguarding and independent advocacy. It is something that is quite relevant and inextricably linked to the work of the Joint Committee on Disability Matters and the Joint Committee on Children and Equality. In phase one and phase three in 2027 and 2029, respectively, the reform must include the recognition of harm against non-verbal or disabled children as a serious safeguarding crime. There must be disability-informed safeguarding protocols and training across all agencies involved in carrying out the continuum of care during and after the family court process. I wish to make a couple of suggestions. These have come forward from parents whom I have had the privilege to meet and hear from. The first is the automatic appointment of an independent advocate or guardian ad litem in any legal process involving a non-verbal or severely disabled child. I am linking my comments specifically to the joint committee work because there is a very timely overlap. I reference Frederick Douglass, who said, "It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men." I will briefly refer to Tusla. Many Members have probably gone to that topic before me. This is relevant to an interaction with a parent as recently as yesterday. We have approximately 100,000 referrals. In the absence of accurate data regarding repetition as to the number of revolving-door incidents, this distils down to 51,000 children. I met a mother yesterday, purely by chance, at a committee meeting being held to discuss another matter. The incident stuck all of us who heard about it. The woman in question has two daughters. Between them, they have been the subject of 32 referrals to Tusla in four years. This is linked to a domestic violence case. The referral cases have been closed because they do not meet certain criteria. There absolutely needs to be a root-and-branch reform of the system. Data, in this instance, is linked entirely to families and children. There is also a link to housing policy. Take the example of Meath County Council and those presenting for emergency housing accommodation. It took three years, but I kept asking for a breakdown of those presentations number of presentations. I discovered that the primary reason for presentation is marital breakdown. I take this opportunity to link with what Deputy Gibney said in the context of the prevention, mediation and family resource centres. I acknowledge the increased funding for family resource centres, but Tusla is at the beginning, the middle and the end of all of this. Fiscal resourcing is necessary but empathy is absolutely critical. I trust the Minister to work with all stakeholders, including the recently formed cross-party committee, to ensure the child is prioritised and mothers and fathers are supported. If this does not happen, lifelong trauma will ensue, and the body bares the scars.

Sentiment score: 0.07