Prime
High Court orders govt on early detection of autism
This picture taken in 2015 shows Ms Dorothy Nambi interacting with children at her centre for autistic children in Ntinda, a Kampala surburb. Austic children are slow learners. PHOTO/FILE
What you need to know:
Justice Nabisinde relied on the evidence of Dr Catherine Aboo, who in her testimony told court that there was a delay in making correct diagnosis of Perez’s health condition, which was done at 12 years instead of being done at one-and-a-half years
Government has been ordered to provide outreach and early detection services in health facilities to be able to detect early a health condition known as autism in children.
In her March 10 ruling, Justice Winifred Nabisinde of Jinja High Court agreed with the petitioners that failure by government to sensitise the public about autism in children is a violation of their right to health.
“Having analysed all the above evidence and the submissions of learned counsels for the plaintiffs, it is clear that government failed to provide medical facilities in Buyende District, which could have made early detection and management services for children born with autism. This, in my view, made it impossible for parents with such children to get early diagnosis and early intervention programmes, which have been shown to improve functional outcomes and quality of life,” Justice Nabisinde ruled.
“I, therefore, agree with the submission of learned counsel for the plaintiffs that the failure of the 1st and 2nd (Buyende District Local Government and Attorney General) defendants to provide access to early detection services for autism to the 4th plaintiff (Perez Mwase) at the primary health care level is a violation of his right to life,” she added.
Autism is a complex, lifelong developmental disability that typically appears during early childhood and can impact a person’s social skills and communication.
The judge in her analysis cited the Mental Health Act, 2018, which demands that primary health care be provided treatment for mental illness to all patients taken to the health facility.
Further in her ruling, Justice Nabisinde relied on the evidence of Dr Catherine Aboo, who in her testimony told court that there was a delay in making correct diagnosis of Perez’s health condition, which was done at 12 years instead of being done at one-and-a-half years.
“…The current intellectual understanding is that at the age of 12 years, some deviation in development should have been picked and interventions started. However, in Uganda, children come to the clinic at the age of 5-6 years and they hardly get one and a half to two years for diagnosis,” Justice Nabisinde said while quoting the testimony of Dr Aboo.
The ruling and the subsequent orders of the court arose out of a 2017 law suit in which a civil society organisation, Center for Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD), alongside Ms Lovisa Namwebya, the mother of an autistic child, and her sister, Ms Esther Naigaga, sued the Attorney General and Buyende District Local Government.
The autism victim, Mwase, was also a joint defendant but sued through his next of kin, Ms Naigaga.
When outreach staff from CEHURD met the victim’s mother, she informed them that she was tying her son on a tree as the only way of restraining him from destroying property.
It was established that when Perez was about four years old, he used to cry a lot at night and also failed to sleep. His parents took him to Kidera hospital where he was first diagnosed with malaria and given treatment, which did not work.
He was further taken to Buyende hospital where he was diagnosed with malaria as well. Perez was later referred to Kamuli-Rubaga hospital where they failed to diagnose his condition and to Nalufenya hospital for children.
Later, a medical expert from Makerere University conducted a mental state examination on Perez, and discovered the condition. It is upon this background that a law suit was filed against Buyende District Local Government and the Attorney General.
Mother’s testimony
Perez’s mother had in her testimony before court stated of how she had never enrolled her son in school, arguing that she didn’t know if there are other children with such a disability.
“If he is left alone, he roams in the village and spoil people’s property. Time came that whenever I would not be home, I would [tether] him,” the mother told court.
