Mental Health Bill 2024: Report and Final Stages Seanad Éireann — 2026-04-16 ============================================================ Mary Butler (FF), Waterford These amendments relate to definitions and references to the relevant carers for children throughout the Bill, to improve the readability of the Bill and to have consistency throughout the Bill, for example, with regard to provision of information to the relevant carer of the child. We discussed in extensive detail the interaction between the Mental Health Bill and the Child Care Act on Committee Stage and the Senators all took part in those discussions. The two pieces of legislation will interact in cases where a child in the care of Tusla requires admission to an inpatient mental health service. A child should have equal access to mental health services based on need, regardless of whether the child comes from a family home or from a care setting. I know this was a concern that some had. The Mental Health Bill takes great care to ensure that children who are the subject of different types of orders and arrangements under the Child Care Act 1991 will be able to access inpatient mental health services on the same basis as children coming from a family home. There are approximately 70 amendments related to the interaction between this Bill and the Child Care Act in the Government's Report Stage amendments. None of these amendments represent a significant change in policy from what is in the Bill at present. Instead, they refine the existing provisions, make the Bill more readable and accessible to the public, and make sure there is consistency across the Bill in how parents and Tusla are treated regarding notifications and, where appropriate, involvement in a young person's care. Following the finalisation of Committee Stage amendments, the Department of Children, Disability and Equality sought additional minor amendments. These are primarily related to the rights of Tusla, where a child is subject to different orders under the Child Care Act, to be notified of certain actions under the Mental Health Act such as admission and discharge. Following further consultation with the Department of children, officials in my Department and in the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel drafted a number of amendments to reflect the Department of children's views and to make the Bill much more readable for people. As Senators can see, the amendments will introduce three definitions at the start of the Bill, which set out the different roles and entitlements of parents, guardians and Tusla regarding children, depending on the age of the child and his or her admission status. Throughout Part 4 of the Bill, these definitions are used as a shorthand instead of spelling out each type of Child Care Act order or arrangement referred to in longhand each time. The three definitions are "relevant carer", "relevant consulted carer" and "relevant notified carer". There are 20 amendments to insert "relevant carer" into the Bill. In each case this definition will replace the longhand version, which is "his or her parents or guardian or the Agency, with the consent of his or her parents or guardian or the Agency". The definition does not change the policy behind the reference. I want to be really clear that there is no change in policy; it is just what the Department of children officials requested us to do. It makes it easier to read. There are 22 amendments to insert "relevant consulted carer". This definition sets out the different entitlements of parents and guardians to be consulted about their child's care and treatment and to make decisions on behalf of their child, depending on whether the child is under 16 or over 16 and whether the child has capacity. This definition also sets out in detail the entitlement of Tusla to be consulted about the treatment of a child in its custody, taking account of the various types of orders and arrangements under the Child Care Act. There are ten amendments to insert "relevant notified carer" into the Bill. This definition is required to take account of supervision orders under the Child Care Act 1991. When a child is subject to a supervision order, Tusla has fewer entitlements and rights regarding consultation and personal information regarding the child. This is why we need to differentiate between children who are subject to supervision orders, which is provided for with the "relevant notified carer" definition, and children subject to other Child Care Act orders where the child in the care of Tusla, which is provided for with the "relevant consulted carer" definition. While I appreciate that these definitions are complex on the face of it, they are necessary to ensure that all the complexities between this Bill and the Child Care Act are understood and addressed. The Bill has to work for children in all settings, and this includes children who are subject to different orders and arrangements under the Child Care Act. These amendments ensure the role of parents and the role of Tusla are fully understood in the Bill, and that the rights and entitlements of parents and Tusla are recognised. To simplify it, these amendments are to make sure the Bill is workable with the Child Care Act 1991. They are to ensure there are no unintended consequences, to make sure the role of Tusla and the role of parents are fully understood in the Bill, and to make sure the rights and entitlements of parents and Tusla are recognised. I ask that, if possible, Senators are able to support them. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-04-16/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:49+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-04-16