07 – Child’s age: 5 years

2013/07 – Child’s age: 5 years

Diagnosis: Behavioural Problems

Report of oral hearing: The appellant was accompanied by a Social Worker from the HSE Children and Family Services. She confirmed that her son was attending the childcare services. The Social Worker said it was suspected that he has Autism Spectrum Disorder but his assessment had been delayed as the service was without a Psychologist in 2013. She advised that an appointment was due to be made early in 2014 and that, because of the extremes of [G]’s behaviour, he is placed very high on the list to be seen.

The appellant advised there was a history of Autism in her family, and that she has a brother who is severely disabled, to the extent that he is in residential care from Monday to Friday. She said her mother was the first to notice that [G] was demonstrating similar traits to her brother at a comparable age.

The appellant said [G] has no sense of danger and has to be monitored continuously. He is constantly climbing onto high walls and he even likes to climb onto the top of the fridge or the kitchen units. She said windows have to be tied shut as he is constantly trying to jump out, regardless of the height. He cannot cope with any change in routine or with loud noise and is obsessive with his toys, having a favourite toy in each hand at all times. The Social Worker said that his obsessive nature really stood out when he was observed by their service.

The appellant went on to say that [G] can be quite aggressive towards his siblings, and he pinches them and pulls their hair. He has taken to biting himself, just to see the teeth marks. He is not fully toilet trained. He will use the toilet to urinate but he will not defecate unless he is wearing a nappy. He is attending pre-school, where he has a Special Needs Assistant. He was assessed for Primary School but it was considered that he was not ready. She said that while he will be assessed again for September 2014, it is looking likely that he will need to attend a special school.

The appellant advised that [G] does not mix or play with friends and has to follow a rigid routine. He has a very short attention span and he also repeats what is said to him instead of engaging in a conversation. He babbles a lot and he will screech and hand flap if interrupted. He still drinks from a bottle. He has to be assisted with all activities of daily living and he is very sensitive about certain fabrics touching him and he will refuse to wear clothes made from such fabric. In conclusion, the appellant said that he requires constant supervision to prevent him being a danger to himself or others.

Comments/Conclusions: The Appeals Officer noted that his GP had assessed [G] as follows on the ability/disability profile:

Severely Affected - Learning/Intelligence, Speech

Moderately Affected – Mental Health/Behaviour

Mildly Affected – Balance/Co-ordination

Having considered all of the evidence in this case, including that adduced at oral hearing, she concluded that the appellant’s son, [G], meets the criteria for Domiciliary Care Allowance as laid down in the relevant legislation. In reaching this conclusion, the Appeals Officer noted: he insists in rigidity of routine and if this is broken he will become distraught and can get aggressive; he can be aggressive towards his siblings and he bites himself as if oblivious to the hurt he is causing; he has to be constantly monitored to prevent him being a danger to himself and others; he is still attending pre-school as he is not considered capable of attending primary school; he has a very short attention span, and he is obsessive.

Decision of the Appeals Officer: The appeal is allowed.

Note on decision reason(s): Domiciliary Care Allowance may be paid where a person is providing care at home for a child who has a severe disability, and requires continuous care which is substantially in excess of that normally required by a child of the same age. The qualifying conditions are outlined in social welfare legislation.

Having examined the evidence available in this case, including that presented at oral hearing, I have concluded that with regard to [G] who has a diagnosis of Behavioural Problems, it has been established he currently needs substantial additional care on a continuous basis, as provided for in the legislation. In the circumstances, the appeal is allowed.