Page | 3
21st January 2016
Mr. Ted McEnery,
Committee Secretariat,
Public Accounts Committee,
Leinster House,14
Dublin 2.
Dear Ted,
Please find attached for the immediate attention of the Public Account Committee members clarification briefing note in relation to a story carried in the Irish Examiner yesterday which had inaccuracies in relation to a foster care home in Waterford.
If any further information is required please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours sincerely,
______
Ray Mitchell
Assistant National Director
Parliamentary Affairs Division
Encl.
Briefing Note for the Public Accounts Committee
Re: Update on Waterford Issue
The Irish Examiner, in yesterday’s edition (20th January 2016,) carried the following information which is inaccurate: “…. However, one of the whistle blowers last night said no such apology has yet been given directly to the alleged victim of abuse”, “….Despite the HSE’s ‘apology’, the Irish Examiner understands that when an official met the women, the official failed to apologise and instead simply informed her the recommendation were being released.”
The HSE did apologise to the service user as outlined in the reports submitted to the Public Account Committee on the detail of arrangements made -
Given the circumstances the Chief Officer discussed with the local team in Waterford how best to communicate and engage with the service user involved, the service users birth mother and all other relevant stakeholders.
The local HSE team determined that the engagement of staff from the local voluntary service provider was essential to assist the HSE in understanding and determining how best to engage and communicate with the service user. Hence it was agreed to engage with the voluntary service provider staff to facilitate the process to ensure the service user was very well supported and no undue distress was caused.
On 9 December, the local disability manager discussed with the CEO of the voluntary service provider the request for HSE staff to meet with the service user and outlined the content and objectives of this meeting. The Disability Manager, on behalf of the HSE, asked for the voluntary service provider staff to assist us in the process, including advice and co-ordination to best meet service user’s needs. The CEO of the voluntary service provider suggested and arranged that the HSE Disability Manager and Social Worker meet with service user on the 10 December at 14.00 hrs. The Disability Manager had met the service user previously, understood that there may be challenges relating to communication, and appreciated the input from voluntary service provider staff as to how to approach this to minimise any potential distress for service user.
During this conversation it was agreed that, as the voluntary provider service staff know the service user best, and have a trusting relationship, that the CEO and indentified staff member, and the Person in Charge of the service users residence, would also attend.
In collaboration and under the guidance of the voluntary service provider staff it was agreed:
· That the communication needed to be handled carefully not to overwhelm the service user. The Disability Manager agreed with the CEO that only the Principal Social Worker, and the identified staff member from the voluntary provider, would actually be present to talk the service user through the information using an informal process. It was agreed that the Disability Manager, the CEO and the person in charge of the residential unit would attend but very much in the background.
· The service user would not actually receive a formal letter at the meeting given the service users communication ability and the CEO of the voluntary service would l advise further how this might be dealt with after the meeting.
On December 10th, the Disability Manager, the Principal Social Worker, the CEO and the identified staff member of the voluntary organisation met. It was confirmed, through consultation with the voluntary service provider, that only the Principal Social Worker and identified staff member of the voluntary provider would go through the update with the service user.
The service user was accompanied by an individual who sat in on the update.
The Principal Social Worker, as a representative of the HSE at this meeting, apologised to the service user for what had occurred. This happened very early in the meeting after general introductions. The meeting in total lasted approximately 10 minutes under the facilitation of the voluntary service provider staff.
Later that day the Disability manager was able to talk to the service user’s birth mother on the phone and informed her of what had occurred including the names and roles of staff from both the HSE and voluntary service provider that had met with the service user earlier. This conversation also included an apology on behalf of the HSE and offers of support.
The format and people present were guided by the voluntary service provider staff to ensure service userfelt safe, not overwhelmed and to minimise any undue distress. The main objectives were: to meet the service user in person to apologise and provide information in an appropriate manner to ensure the service user knew what had occurred in regard to the report and recommendations. The Principal Social worker as there was a competent representative of the HSE at a senior level with the necessary skills and understanding to meet with the service user and the service users current care providers and advocates. The Principal Social Worker was also known to the voluntary service provider staff who facilitated this meeting which assisted the process. The voluntary provider staff also advised to keep the communication on a more informal basis again in the best interests of the service user.
The Chief Officer and team members of the HSE remain in contact with the voluntary service provider staff and intend to continue a process of visits over time as appropriate and in the best interests of the se4rvice user
Page | 3