A Cork mother has claimed in the High Court that her son was unlawfully taken from her by the Southern Health Board (SHB), which was "conned" by the boy's father, whom she claims is a paedophile.
The woman is seeking damages for the "loss, pain and suffering" she suffered when her son, now aged 20, was taken from her. The woman, who is conducting her own case, told Mr Justice Smyth that the alleged negligence of the health board arose from their "gullibility in being duped by a paedophile", who she alleges is the father and who was allegedly sexually abusing her son. The board denies the claims.
In her opening statement, the mother said that if the board had followed guidelines, it would have uncovered the alleged sexual abuse and "a vice ring of paedophiles operating in Cork".
She said the abuse had left her son with severe emotional, psychological and behavioural problems. He had first come to the health board's notice when five years old and had been taken into care when he was 11.
She alleged that the father, who went to England in 1987, had abducted the child. When she took steps to have him returned to Ireland, the SHB told the English authorities he should stay in England, she said.
The board got itself into a "mind-set" that she and her male friend were the abusers, the woman said. Despite no evidence to that effect, the board had maintained this view to the present. She and her friend had proved their innocence of all allegations against them, the woman said.
While working as a teacher in Britain, she had married her son's father. By 1986 the marriage and her state of mind had disintegrated. Following court proceedings, it was agreed there would be joint custody of her son. In 1992 she discovered the board had got a District Court "place and safety order" for her son.
In 1993 she was awarded unconditional custody of the boy. She alleged the board had admitted it had her son in unlawful custody during parts of 1992.
In its defence, the board claims that in 1992 the son ran away from his mother's family home. It rejected the claim that the boy was suffering from a personality or behaviour disorder.
The board disputed the mother's construction of the court order which awarded her custody of her son. It did not admit the custody was "full and unconditional", as alleged, and denied it had ever indicated its detention of the boy was unlawful.
The board also denied there was any evidence that the father had sexually abused his son or used his son as a prostitute in a paedophile ring, as alleged.