Return to a children’s home

The Ombudsman dealt with a case of an 18-year-old man who was ordered institutional care by court when he was a minor. After coming of legal age, he entered into an Agreement on Voluntary Stay with the children’s home. He stayed at the home for about six month on the basis of said Agreement, then he terminated the Agreement and left the children’s home. At the same time, he withdrew from his studies. The director of the children’s home provided him with accommodation in a halfway home and paid him a one-off financial contribution. However, the Complainant changed his mind after a short time, wished to return to the children’s home and resume his studies. He approached me when the children’s home employees told him he could not return to the children’s home.

The Ombudsman recommended to the Complainant to resume his studies, which he did. The director of the facility was subsequently advised that should she fail to enter into the Agreement with the Complainant, she would be in breach of legal regulations. The Institutional Care Act stipulates that the agreement with a dependant who is continuously preparing for his/her future career (i.e. he/she is a student) can be entered into at any time within one year of the termination of institutional or protective education of a minor, provided that the facility does not exceed the maximum allowed number of children in the facility. In this way, the law creates a certain protective period for students coming of legal age who leave the facilities for institutional and protective care, allowing them to return to the facilities. At the same time, it holds that according to the law, the director of a facility is not obliged to pay a severance (one-off financial contribution in the sense of Section 33 of the institutional Care Act) to dependents leaving the facility following termination of their voluntary stay. The director of the facility thus does not have to worry about a potential misuse of repeated conclusion of an agreement for the purpose of financial enrichment of a young adult.

The director of the children’s home in question was grateful for the legal interpretation of the unclear legislation and subsequently entered into a new Agreement on Voluntary Stay with the Complainant. The Complainant returned to the children’s home and the Ombudsman closed her inquiry.