HSE told to assist parents of anorexic man

A JUDGE has said he hopes the HSE will not to be stingy when it comes to financially supporting a couple whose son is critically ill with anorexia and getting treatment in England.

High Court president Judge Peter Kelly said the parents’ involvement in their son’s care is pivotal, and he hopes the HSE will not be ‘parsimonious’ or ‘unreasonable’.

The man’s mother said she had only asked for stg£50 a night for hospital accommodation, once every three weeks, but that the HSE has indicated it will stop paying this.

Judge Kelly noted that the university graduate, who is in his 20s and cannot be identified by order of the court, had to be sent to an eating disorder clinic in England as the appropriate facilities are not provided here. He said the man, who is a ward of court, had a 13-year history with anorexia nervosa.

He had been to hospital in Ireland on five occasions, but had always had a rapid relapse after discharge, the judge said. When he was sent to England, in May, he weighed just 42kg and had a body mass index of just 13.4, which was said to be in the critical range, the judge said. He had made good progress initially, had gained 4kg between May and early July, but had since reached a plateau and was refusing food, the court heard.

The man’s mother told the court she and his father would travel to the centre every three weeks, where as well as visiting and encouraging their son, they would be present for ward visits by his treating doctors and nurses, and engage in family therapy. These had proved to be too tiring for their son all in one day, so they were attempting to spread the therapy and ward rounds over two days.

She said they had only claimed for flights and the hospital accommodation, with no meals, and that while the HSE had paid these to date, they had been told they would have to make one-day visits in future.

Judge Kelly said: ‘I would be horrified if I found that the HSE was going to be parsimonious in relation to the discharge of reasonable expenses. The only reason they have to go to England is because the HSE does not and cannot provide the service.’

He ordered the man’s treatment to continue, with a review in November, and gave all sides liberty to return to court should the HSE ‘behave unreasonably’.