A Co Waterford-based woman has been convicted of cruelty to her son after a seven-week trial at the Central Criminal Court.
On Friday, the boy's father was convicted on nine counts of raping the boy from the time he was six years old.
He was also convicted of cruelty.
The mother was acquitted on two charges of sexual assault and the jury resumed deliberating this morning on a charge of cruelty.
The parents originally faced a total of 82 charges but 60 of those were dropped towards the end of the trial after legal issues arose.
The jury acquitted the father on nine charges of sexual assault.
Gardaí objected to bail for the woman as they said she no longer had any ties to Ireland and all her immediate family live outside the country.
They said she has four other children, two of whom are adults, and she has no contact with them. One of children, who is still underage, is in the process of being adopted and another was adopted immediately after birth and she has had no contact with this child.
Mr Justice Robery Eagar said he would remand her in custody for sentence in July. On Friday the 64-year-old father was remanded in custody and will also be sentenced in July.
The child gave his evidence by videolink from the UK where he is now in a specialised treatment unit.
He had an intermediary to help explain questions to him. It was the first time an intermediary was used in an Irish court following the introduction of new measures to support victims.
A number of other measures were taken for the child's welfare while giving evidence, including regular breaks.
The judge and barristers did not wear wigs and gowns.
The child was not required to take an oath but Mr Justice Robert Eagar told the jury that he had established that he knew the difference between truth and lies.
During his evidence the boy said he had been regularly raped, beaten, abused and threatened by his father, forced to have sex with his mother and at one point had been locked in a box.
He alleged his father videotaped some of the abuse and had shown it to others.
He was taken into care at the age of eight after telling a teacher about physical abuse by his father. He was then in a number of foster homes. He also said he had been sexually abused in one of those foster homes.
In his last foster home he began to display disturbing, sexualised behaviour and then revealed the alleged sexual abuse.
A foster mother who gave evidence to the trial said the child had confided in her about the abuse by his parents and had displayed behaviour that was of concern.
She said he needed constant reassurance that he was safe. She agreed that the boy had a good imagination but she said she believed his story. She said he read and wrote a lot and had written an outline for a book he was planning called 'My Life in My Hell'.
Eventually he had to leave her home because of his behaviour and go into specialised care in the UK.
She remembered the last thing the boy said to her was: "I feel like a dog that nobody wants".
Lawyers for the father said he believed social workers were responsible for brainwashing the boy into making allegations after he was taken into care in 2011.
Defence barrister Colman Cody told the jury there could be a kernel of truth in that because social workers had failed to inform gardaí that the boy had retracted his allegations at one point.
The boy had described the allegations of sexual abuse as "not real" but later said he had done this because he did not want to have to go through a court case.
Mr Cody said it demonstrated that social workers were only going to countenance one narrative. He said the family home was not idyllic but it was a home of love, affection and care. He said the child was capable of making things up and embellishing them.
Senior Counsel John O'Kelly, who defended the mother, said the boy's allegations that he was forced to have sex with his mother at the age of seven or eight was "simply unbelievable".
He said there was a massive question mark over the boy's testimony and he had shown he could "make things up at the drop of a hat".
Prosecuting counsel Pauline Walley told the jury no one wanted to believe this kind of horror could be meted out to a child but she urged the jurors to judge the case on the evidence they had heard.
She said the evidence of the now 12-year-old was sometimes inconsistent but this could be because he had tried to block things out. He was also trying to remember events from half a lifetime ago for him.
The judge thanked the jury for their commitment to the case and for the service they had provided as citizens.
He said they would not be required to serve on a jury for another 15 years.
