A teenager with active epilepsy is to be treated with potentially life-saving anti-seizure medication against her mother’s wishes, the High Court has ruled.
The girl’s mother does not accept she has epilepsy and has attributed her seizures to “electromagnetic” forces, including eclipses of the sun and moon, and a “blocked chakra”, and refused to consent to treatment with anti-seizure and rescue medication.
In a sworn statement, the mother said she has a strong religious belief and “lives her life by the holy scriptures and the guidance of Jesus Christ”, Judge Conor Dignam noted. She is her daughter’s full-time carer and has home schooled her for some years.
The woman previously stopped prescribed medication for her daughter due to what she described as “severe” side effects, including her daughter becoming aggressive and angry. Her view is there are alternative methods and treatments available, the court heard.
The girl’s treating doctors and an independent neurologist all agreed she has epilepsy and considered her life at risk if the prescribed medication is not administered.
During a seizure in a public venue earlier this year, the girl was unconscious for 12 minutes, the court heard.
The girl’s court-appointed guardian agreed there is a “warm and affectionate” bond between mother and daughter. However, they believed the mother is “very fixed” in her views and this impeded her daughter’s ability to access services and to socialise. This had, in some respects, led to aspects of the girl’s life remaining unfulfilled and isolated, the guardian said.
The mother’s views included that she herself is “a magician”, the seizures were caused by a “blocked chakra” in her daughter’s heart and cling film could be wrapped around her daughter’s chest to prevent “negative energy” reaching the chakra, the guardian said.
In a judgment published on Thursday, Judge Conor Dignam granted an application by Tusla, the child and family agency, supported by the girl’s father and guardian, for orders for administration of the prescribed medication.
The orders require the mother to store the medication at home and make it accessible to a public-health nurse; to permit the nurse to enter the home, along with two agency staff already dealing with the family welfare; and to permit administration of the medication there.
Dignam said all parties agreed there is a close and loving relationship between the girl and her mother and that, other than the medication issue, the mother provides proper care for her daughter.
The doctors and an independent neurologist all agreed the girl has epilepsy and her seizures are epileptic and not caused by electromagnetic forces, he said.
He found the diagnosis of epilepsy “sound and correct”, and ruled that administration of the medications is necessary and will be, or is likely to be, of benefit to the girl and in her best interests.
The balance here is between “a risk of temporary side effects and risk of serious injury or death”, he said.
On the evidence, he was satisfied the mother’s choice not to permit the administration of medication prejudicially affects the girl’s health and welfare to such an extent that amounted to “a failure of parental duty” to her daughter.
The mother did not adduce any evidence to support her alternative diagnosis of the causes of the girl’s seizures or any evidence to support her preferred treatment, he said.
He was satisfied the court’s orders were “proportionate” and they left intact the mother’s other rights and responsibilities regarding her daughter’s care.
Because the orders involved medical treatment and “an ongoing interference” with constitutional rights, the judge made provision for regular reviews of the situation.