The parents of a mentally-disabled man have walked free from the Lower Criminal Court after a judge ruled they were not guilty of abandoning their son at a government hospital for 10 years.
The court acquitted the Bahraini father and mother of refusing to take their son home after learning about the family’s difficult circumstances and their child’s harrowing story.
The court heard that the disabled Bahraini, now aged in his 40s with a mental age of a 10-year-old, had been a victim of sexual assault and contracted a life-altering sexually-transmitted infection (STI) as a result.
The parents told the court that they were unable to take care of their son, control him when his behaviour became erratic, or protect him from malicious individuals who meant to harm him.
A report by a social worker recommended that the man should remain in hospital.
Lawyer Isa Ibrahim, who represented his parents, explained that they were elderly, in poor health and could not afford to hire a nurse to take care of him.
“I wish I could bring my son home – I love him and he’s my firstborn – but I can’t,” the father addressed the judge at a hearing. “We take care of him to the best of our ability; we do all that we can.
“But we do not have enough strength to control him and his being outside of a medical facility endangers both him and others,” the 67-year-old added.
“Before entering the hospital, he was sexually assaulted, robbed and beaten. He had been assaulted several times by several individuals.
“I worry that he would be assaulted again if he leaves the hospital, and the disease he suffers from will spread.”
The Public Prosecution also earlier accused the parents of pocketing disability benefits from the Social Development Ministry, while having ‘abandoned’ their child, which they denied.
Mr Ibrahim clarified that the parents spend more on their son than the amount of money provided by the government as disability assistance, despite their precarious economic situation.
He stated that they constantly had to buy him clothes since he often soiled himself, and that they paid for all of his meals since he does not eat hospital food.
“We visit him regularly, every Friday, and we take him out to eat or to spend time at home with us on every single Eid and all the other holidays,” the father added.
The parents’ other son testified that the accusations made against his parents were ‘completely untrue’ and that the now-acquitted defendants, themselves, needed to be taken care of.
A court-ordered social and psychological evaluation report came to the conclusion that the disabled man would be better off staying in the hospital.
“After listening to what the family had to say, and studying the social and psychological aspects of the situation, we see that the defendants are elderly and have a son who suffers from both a mental disability and an STI, inflicted upon him by unidentified individuals,” read the report.
“It became clear that the defendants’ health circumstances do not allow them to take care of their son, and their economic condition means that they cannot afford to hire a nurse to take care of him. They cannot take care of him in a way that suits his condition.”
The case was first brought to the authorities’ attention after a complaint was lodged by the Government Hospitals Long-Term Stay Committee to the Public Prosecution.
The complaint stated that the son’s health condition did not require his stay in the hospital to which he was admitted in 2015 ‘to receive treatment for an autoimmune disease’.
“The son was to be discharged after only two weeks of his admission, but his parents allegedly refused to take him home despite repeated attempts to convince them to take their son and to care for him,” said the prosecution statement.
“Due to his parent’s behaviour, the patient spent more than 10 years at the hospital. His mental disability means that he has the cognitive skills of a 10-year-old, but he does not pose a danger to his family or society.”
The prosecution charged the Bahraini couple and the case was brought to the criminal court. In its verdict, the judge described the evidence provided by the prosecution as ‘dubious’.
zainab@gdnmedia.bh
&uuid=(email))