Mother and Baby Homes

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
10,405
This is a link to the Executive summary of the Final Report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes.
It is well worth reading.

There have been accusations that the Catholic Church gets off very lightly and that does seem to be the case but it is without doubt that Catholic (and Protestant) Ireland was a cruel place. On top of the Mother and Baby homes we had the Magdalene Laundries and the highest proportion of people in Mental Health Institutions of any country in the world. What blame the Church has for this is debatable and complex; the Church influenced the attitudes of the State but the attitudes of the State also influenced the Church.
The most culpable group is, in my opinion, the fathers of the children. They were just as responsible for the pregnancy but faced absolutely no consequences. Their actions in many cases were selfish, callous and cowardly.

The Mother and baby homes did change significantly during the late 1940's and again from the 1970's. By the time of their closure they were generally positive and supportive organisations which generally acted as advocates for the women. That doesn't in any way diminish their horrific history.

Ireland was a cold and heartless place for those who didn't conform to narrow societal norms. Women, especially poor women, illegitimate children and gay people (the BT+ bit wasn't even known back then) were treated with a heartlessness and cruelty which is hard to comprehend now. We were a society without empathy and humanity; faith and hope but very little charity.

Edit: Link Fixed
 
Last edited:

Ceist Beag

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,264
The most culpable group is, in my opinion, the fathers of the children. They were just as responsible for the pregnancy but faced absolutely no consequences. Their actions in many cases were selfish, callous and cowardly.
Their actions were also criminal in many cases Purple.
 

odyssey06

Frequent Poster
Messages
2,914
An Taoiseach:
“What has been described in this report wasn’t imposed on us by any foreign power... We did this to ourselves, as a society.
He said the State treated women badly and children especially badly.
“We had a completely warped attitude to sexuality and intimacy... Young mothers and their sons and daughters paid a terrible price for that dysfunction.”

 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
10,405
An Taoiseach:
“What has been described in this report wasn’t imposed on us by any foreign power... We did this to ourselves, as a society.
He said the State treated women badly and children especially badly.
“We had a completely warped attitude to sexuality and intimacy... Young mothers and their sons and daughters paid a terrible price for that dysfunction.”

I think An Taoiseach is also giving the Religious orders a free pass. From the Executive Summary (the same one that has been criticised for giving the Church a free ride):
"The first proposal for mother and baby homes in Ireland came in the 1907 ViceRegal Commission on the Irish Poor Law. At the time the workhouses were the only institutions providing for unmarried mothers. The Vice-Regal Commission suggested that unmarried mothers and their children should no longer be accommodated in workhouses but in dedicated mother and baby homes. These homes should be owned and run by religious organisations; alternatively they should be established by local authorities, who would place them under the control of a religious community. This became the template that was implemented by the Irish Free State."
The Churches paws are all over this.
 

mathepac

Frequent Poster
Messages
7,274
An Taoiseach:
“What has been described in this report wasn’t imposed on us by any foreign power... We did this to ourselves, as a society.

“We had a completely warped attitude to sexuality and intimacy... Young mothers and their sons and daughters paid a terrible price for that dysfunction.”
No Micheál, you clown, you coward, I did none of this but you and your cohort did and collectively, you continued the abuse yesterday. With regard to warped attitudes to sexuality and intimacy, please speak for yourselves - you do not speak for me.

Below is the text of an email I sent to Government party leaders and Sir Roderic the Gormless. Versions have also gone to the Labour party leader, independents, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle herself, etc.

BTW, any idea why this topic is in the depths? This government con-job is being visited on all of us AGAIN.

"I am appalled that after generations of suffering, death, and abuse those who survived and those who died in the mother and baby homes were further abused and disrespected by the report the Government has had since last October and published yesterday in a flood of crocodile tears while denying the survivors and contributors the right to read their own stories first. More disgraceful PR and "spin" from our political leaders. Individually and collectively you should hang your heads in shame

I'm not sure how my reaction to Catherine Connoly's comment about the report will sit with you but I found it magnificent; brave, articulate, direct, and touching on everything that was wrong about the authors' compilation work, the poor, semi-literate content, the excuse-making at an early stage, the complete lack of empathy for people, women and children, who suffered dreadful wrongs at the hands of the State, the Church and their agents and agencies. But as Catherine highlighted the report finds that only the English were inhumane in their treatment of PFIs or "pregnant from Ireland".

Even the Executive Summary, the first part of the report I had access to, in the very first paragraph contains the following two sentences, strategically placed to try to influence the reader's mindset before reading further:

"The experience of women and children in the 1920s was vastly different from the experience in the 1990s regardless of where they lived. The institutions under investigation changed considerably over the period: the two largest institutions were in operation for the entire period but they were very different institutions in 1998 than they were in 1922. "

In other words, things were bad back then, but look at how they've improved since "thanks to us" implied. Disrespect for the readers as well as the victims and survivors.

I'm disgusted with your Government, all of them. It is not my Government because the parties in it got none of my votes, not even transfers - I made sure of that.

If there is any way in which I can help right these disgraceful wrongs perpetrated by you and your predecessors on poor, weak, and deprived people for nigh on 100 years, I promise you I will find it.

Thank You for nothing, again."
 

mathepac

Frequent Poster
Messages
7,274
The replies are flooding in as expected. Ryan has the temerity to address me as his friend; thankfully it's a lie, I am not now nor was I ever his friend nor even an acquaitance, although we have friends in common.

" A chara,

Many thanks for your email. As I am sure you can appreciate, I receive a large volume of emails on a daily basis. Your issue is important to me and myself or one of my team will be back to you as soon as possible.

In the meantime, if you have a query relating to the below areas, you might find the following email addresses helpful:

Matters related to Dublin Bay South constituency: eamon.ryan@oireachtas.ie
Matters related to the Dept of Environment, Climate, Communications networks: minister.ryan@decc.gov.ie
Matters related to Dept of Transport: minister@transport.gov.ie

Wishing you all the best,

Eamon

Eamon Ryan TD
Minister for Environment, Climate, Communications and Transport"


"The Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Leo Varadkar, T.D. acknowledges receipt of your correspondence.

If the issue raised is more appropriate to another Government Department we will arrange to transfer your correspondence to that Department for attention and direct reply to you.

Thank you for your email.

Yours sincerely,
Office of the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment."

and repeated as Gaeilge. Thanks Teesh.

And from the pseudo-Teesh

"Thank you for your email to the Taoiseach.

As you can appreciate, we are currently experiencing a very large increase in the volume of emails received into this Office due to the Covid-19 pandemic. We appreciate your understanding.
You may wish to be aware that the latest information in relation to Covid-19 may be obtained at https://www.gov.ie/en/campaigns/c36c85-covid-19-coronavirus/"

The only one who doesn't miss a chance to blame COVID-19, maybe it infected his latest very expensive heap of toilet paper too.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
10,405
No Micheál, you clown, you coward, I did none of this but you and your cohort did and collectively, you continued the abuse yesterday. With regard to warped attitudes to sexuality and intimacy, please speak for yourselves - you do not speak for me.

Below is the text of an email I sent to Government party leaders and Sir Roderic the Gormless. Versions have also gone to the Labour party leader, independents, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle herself, etc.

BTW, any idea why this topic is in the depths? This government con-job is being visited on all of us AGAIN.

"I am appalled that after generations of suffering, death, and abuse those who survived and those who died in the mother and baby homes were further abused and disrespected by the report the Government has had since last October and published yesterday in a flood of crocodile tears while denying the survivors and contributors the right to read their own stories first. More disgraceful PR and "spin" from our political leaders. Individually and collectively you should hang your heads in shame

I'm not sure how my reaction to Catherine Connoly's comment about the report will sit with you but I found it magnificent; brave, articulate, direct, and touching on everything that was wrong about the authors' compilation work, the poor, semi-literate content, the excuse-making at an early stage, the complete lack of empathy for people, women and children, who suffered dreadful wrongs at the hands of the State, the Church and their agents and agencies. But as Catherine highlighted the report finds that only the English were inhumane in their treatment of PFIs or "pregnant from Ireland".

Even the Executive Summary, the first part of the report I had access to, in the very first paragraph contains the following two sentences, strategically placed to try to influence the reader's mindset before reading further:

"The experience of women and children in the 1920s was vastly different from the experience in the 1990s regardless of where they lived. The institutions under investigation changed considerably over the period: the two largest institutions were in operation for the entire period but they were very different institutions in 1998 than they were in 1922. "

In other words, things were bad back then, but look at how they've improved since "thanks to us" implied. Disrespect for the readers as well as the victims and survivors.

I'm disgusted with your Government, all of them. It is not my Government because the parties in it got none of my votes, not even transfers - I made sure of that.

If there is any way in which I can help right these disgraceful wrongs perpetrated by you and your predecessors on poor, weak, and deprived people for nigh on 100 years, I promise you I will find it.

Thank You for nothing, again."
I agree that the report is very badly written. The language used and sentence structure is like a something from a transition year student.
The more I read it the less I like it.

As for it being the Government's fault and not that of Irish society generally, sorry I don't buy it. This government wasn't in power during any of the period referenced in the report. The culpability lies with the Institutions of the State, the Government, the Religious orders and hierarchy and the generations of people in general who were alive at the time but most of all it lies with the families and fathers who betrayed their daughters and partners when they were most in need.
 

Leo

Moderator
Messages
12,022
As for it being the Government's fault and not that of Irish society generally, sorry I don't buy it. This government wasn't in power during any of the period referenced in the report.
I only know of one person directly affected by this. In that case it wasn't the church or the state who sent the pregnant teen to the home, it was their parents who did so to avoid the shame and scorn from their neighbours and peers.
 

Ceist Beag

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,264
Agree with Purple on the point of culpability. That said, this Government are responsible for the management of the report this week. I 100% agree with Catherine Connolly in her view that the Government have attempted to control the narrative here by leaking the report to media at the weekend and then failing to supply a copy of the report to the survivors - and even claiming that they had done so. It's a shameful way of treating the survivors.
 

mathepac

Frequent Poster
Messages
7,274
OK, @Purple just to be clear.

First of all, there is the report itself which is a disgrace on many fronts, including the conclusions drawn. Read the executive summary on its own and there is no support for the conclusions drawn, despite the editorializing the writers indulged themselves in.

Secondly, there is the way the publication of the report was stage-managed, in a most sneaky, disrespectful, and underhanded way, keeping the stories of the people whose lives (and deaths, as many as 9,000 of them) formed the majority of the evidence secret until the Government got their pre-emptive crocodile tears, PR slants and spin on the record.

When Martin apologized to the survivors yesterday, no-one knew what he was apologizing for, making the apology an empty, pointless and disgraceful gesture adding insult to those already grossly injured and wronged.

If anyone gets a chance, please view the Leas-Cheann Comhairle Catherine Connolly's address to the house in connection with the report. I received an email from a party leader praising her address as "one of the best heard in a long time". Maybe listening to her speak will dispel the wave of suffocating apathy my post has failed to dispel.

Do the three Unwise Men speak for you? If they do then this is not the country I thought it was.
 
Last edited:

mathepac

Frequent Poster
Messages
7,274
I only know of one person directly affected by this. In that case it wasn't the church or the state who sent the pregnant teen to the home, it was their parents who did so to avoid the shame and scorn from their neighbours and peers.
Doctors, priests, families, impregnators and others referred these unfortunate women, 12% of them under 18 years of age, some as young as 12, to these places, a lot of them no better than concentration camps.

Read the report and get access to more than 500 survivors' stories whose evidence this report is meant to represent. The issue in any case is not just about how the mothers got into these homes, but how they and their children were treated while there, and, if they managed to survive, how they fared afterward.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
10,405
. That said, this Government are responsible for the management of the report this week. I 100% agree with Catherine Connolly in her view that the Government have attempted to control the narrative here by leaking the report to media at the weekend and then failing to supply a copy of the report to the survivors - and even claiming that they had done so. It's a shameful way of treating the survivors.
I agree. The ham-fisted attempt to manage this was disgraceful. The leading of the report was appalling. Martin's apology was a long way short of Enda Kenny's palpable anger when he spoke in the Dail about abuse.
Catherine Connolly was superb.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
10,405
First of all, there is the report itself which is a disgrace on many fronts, including the conclusions drawn. Read the executive summary on its own and there is no support for the conclusions drawn, despite the editorializing the writers indulged themselves in.
I agree with you there.
Secondly, there is the way the publication of the report was stage-managed, in a most sneaky, disrespectful, and underhanded way, keeping the stories of the people whose lives (and deaths, as many as 9,000 of them) formed the majority of the evidence secret until the Government got their pre-emptive crocodile tears, PR slants and spin on the record.
I agree with you there too.
When Martin apologized to the survivors yesterday, no-one knew what he was apologizing for, making the apology an empty, pointless and disgraceful gesture adding insult to those already grossly injured and wronged.
That's a bit harsh. I do agree that he bungled the whole thing.
If anyone gets a chance, please view Catherine Connolly's address to the house in connection with the report. I received an email from a party leader praising her address as "one of the best heard in a long time". Maybe listening to her speak will dispel the wave of suffocating apathy my post has failed to dispel.
I listened to her. She was brilliant. The ithers reminded me of when the RC Church expresses "regret and sorrow" over raping children and then covering it up. As a Priest friend of mine said "where's the anger? Where's the rage at what happened in their name on their watch?" All of the party leaders were too scripted, too measured.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
10,405
Doctors, priests, families, impregnators and others referred these unfortunate women, 12% of them under 18 years of age, some as young as 12, to these places, a lot of them no better than concentration camps.

Read the report and get access to more than 500 survivors' stories whose evidence this report is meant to represent. The issue in any case is not just about how the mothers got into these homes, but how they and their children were treated while there, and, if they managed to survive, how they fared afterward.
Children were collateral damage in a society which was lead by men and dominated by celibate men who feared and in many cases loathes sexuality and particularly female sexuality. The women involved were the focus of the homes and the policies and societal attitude which put them there. They were opened in a time when it was thought that unmarried mothers would become prostitutes if they weren't "saved". The men involved didn't even enter the discussion.

The government was elected from the people and by the people and represented that broader societal view. Should they have known better and lead better? Yes, of course they should, but that doesn't mean the rest of society is excused.
 

mathepac

Frequent Poster
Messages
7,274
Sorry @Purple, I have to make my case again. The issue under discussion as far as I know, is the "Report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes". The Terms of Reference are here http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2015/si/57/made/en/print. The "excuses" about societal issues etc surrounding the homes are made within the report itself, despite them being outwith the TORs, which are pretty straight-forward. How did the women and children get referred to the homes, how were they treated, what were the homes like, and how and where were the surviving mothers and children referred to upon discharge.

Who impregnated the women or school-girls doesn't feature in the TORs based on my reading of them, and is just confusing an already complicated, much-spun matter.
 

Leper

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,356
Children were collateral damage in a society which was lead by men and dominated by celibate men who feared and in many cases loathes sexuality and particularly female sexuality. The women involved were the focus of the homes and the policies and societal attitude which put them there. They were opened in a time when it was thought that unmarried mothers would become prostitutes if they weren't "saved". The men involved didn't even enter the discussion.

The government was elected from the people and by the people and represented that broader societal view. Should they have known better and lead better? Yes, of course they should, but that doesn't mean the rest of society is excused.
Probably the best expounded summary of what happened. The most ignored part of the situation is also contained therein "but that doesn't mean the rest of society is excused."

Have no doubt about it, many Irish people knew what was going on and just turned a blind eye to it. This went on until 1994. Let's not just blame the religious orders or just the government the Irish people living then must take up the blame too.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
10,405
Probably the best expounded summary of what happened. The most ignored part of the situation is also contained therein "but that doesn't mean the rest of society is excused."

Have no doubt about it, many Irish people knew what was going on and just turned a blind eye to it. This went on until 1994. Let's not just blame the religious orders or just the government the Irish people living then must take up the blame too.
Yes, but the points being made by Catherine Connolly are totally valid; there was no calm supplication by the women involved. They were victims of the most heinous state sanctioned violence, both physically and mentally. They were treated worse than criminals by men who acted within and without the law. We treated those who didn't fit in to the "good Christian" model of Irish society appallingly. If you were a woman, if you were black or brown, if you were gay or if you were just different you faced almost certain ostracisation with a good possibility of ending up in a mental hospital/asylum, a county home or a mother and baby home. We essentially unofficially criminalised being different.

The more power and influence people had the more culpable they were so politicians, civil servants, those on health boards and the religious orders which ran institutions must shoulder a significant part of the blame.
 

Purple

Frequent Poster
Messages
10,405
Sorry @Purple, I have to make my case again. The issue under discussion as far as I know, is the "Report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes". The Terms of Reference are here http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2015/si/57/made/en/print. The "excuses" about societal issues etc surrounding the homes are made within the report itself, despite them being outwith the TORs, which are pretty straight-forward. How did the women and children get referred to the homes, how were they treated, what were the homes like, and how and where were the surviving mothers and children referred to upon discharge.

Who impregnated the women or school-girls doesn't feature in the TORs based on my reading of them, and is just confusing an already complicated, much-spun matter.
I think it's worth quoting the terms of reference in full;

Terms of Reference for the Commission of Investigation (Mother and Baby Homes and certain related Matters) Order 2015
Establishment of Commission, etc
(1) The Commission is directed to investigate and to make a report to the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs in accordance with the provisions of Section 32 of the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004 (No. 23 of 2004) on the following matters in relation to the Mother and Baby Homes listed in Appendix 1:
I. To establish the circumstances and arrangements for the entry of single women into these institutions and the exit pathways on their leaving these institutions; this to include consideration of the extent of their participation in relevant decisions;
II. To establish the living conditions and care arrangements experienced by residents during their period of accommodation in these institutions, including by reference to the literature on the living conditions and care experienced by mothers and children applying more generally during the period;
III. To examine mortality amongst mothers and children residing in these institutions (to determine the general causes, circumstances, and rates of mortality) and to compare it to the literature on mortality amongst such other groups of women and children as might be relevant;
IV. To investigate post-mortem practices and procedures in respect of children or mothers who died while resident in these institutions, including the reporting of deaths, burial arrangements and transfer of remains to educational institutions for the purpose of anatomical examination;
V. To establish the extent of compliance with relevant regulatory and ethical standards of the time of systemic vaccine trials found by the Commission to have been conducted on children resident in one or more of these institutions during the relevant period (including, inter alia, vaccine trials conducted using vaccines manufactured by Burroughs Welcome in 1960/61, 1970 or 1973);
VI. To examine arrangements for the entry of children into these institutions in circumstances when their mother was not also resident at the time of their entry;
VII. For children who did not remain in the care of their parents, to examine exit pathways on leaving these institutions so as to establish patterns of referral or relevant relationships with other entities, and in particular to identify-
(a) the extent to which the child’s welfare and protection were considered in practices relating to their placement in Ireland or abroad;
(b) the extent of participation of mothers in relevant decisions, including
(i) the procedures that were in place to obtain consent from mothers in respect of adoption, and
(ii) whether these procedures were adequate for the purpose of ensuring such consent was full, free and informed; and
(c) the practices and procedures for placement of children where there was cooperation with another person or persons in arranging this placement, this to include where an intermediary organisation arranged a subsequent placement;
VIII. To identify, in the context of the specific examinations at (I) to (VII) above, the extent to which any group of residents may have systematically been treated differently on any grounds [religion, race, traveller identity or disability];
IX. The Commission shall not seek to provide an account of any individual case in such manner as to intervene in any effort by any individual to resolve their identity or trace a birth relative.
(2) The investigation shall cover the period from 1922 to 1998 but the Commission may reduce the “relevant period” in respect of any component part or institution if it considers it appropriate to do so.
(3) The Commission shall establish a Confidential Committee to provide a forum for persons who were formerly resident in the homes listed in Appendix 1, or who worked in these institutions, during the relevant period to provide accounts of their experience in these institutions in writing or orally as informally as is possible in the circumstances. Subject to the requirements of Section 8 of the Act, the Commission may appoint persons it deems to be appropriately qualified to be members of the Confidential Committee.
(4) The Confidential Committee shall-
(a) operate under the direction of and be accountable to the Commission,
(b) provide in its procedures for individuals who wish to have their identity remain confidential during the conduct of the Commission and its subsequent reporting, and
(c) produce a report of a general nature on the experiences of the single women and children which the Commission may, to the extent it considers appropriate, rely upon to inform the investigations set out in Article 1.
(5) The Commission shall complete the report or reports required in relation to its investigation no later than 36 months from the date of its establishment, with the exception of the reports required by Articles (4) and (11) of this Order which should be completed within 18 months from the date of its establishment.
(6) The Commission may include in its reports any recommendation that it considers appropriate, including recommendations in relation to relevant matters identified in the course of its investigation which it considers may warrant further investigation in the public interest. In any event, on the completion of the Report on the wider social and historical context required under Article (11) the Commission shall report to the Minister on whether it considers specific matters not included in the existing scope may warrant further investigation as part of the Commission’s work in the public interest.
(7) In order to assist public understanding the Commission should provide in its reports an outline of the archival and other sources of most relevance to these issues and the nature and extent of the records therein, together with the challenges and opportunities in exploiting these sources for the purpose of further historical research or examination.
(8) In this order, except where the circumstances otherwise requires-
“care arrangements” includes institutional practice with regard to the health, safety, welfare and interests of mothers and children;
“intermediary organisation” means a person or persons involved in arranging the further placements of such children;
“literature” references to literature are intended to include grey literature1 ;
“living conditions” means the everyday experience and circumstances of a persons life, including access to food, accommodation, clothing and basic living facilities;
“placement” means the institutional practice for the placement of children other than with a natural parent(s) for the purposes of adoption, fostering, boarding out or other care arrangements;
“residents” means single women and children accommodated in the listed Homes for the purpose of receiving maternity and infant care services; and
“single women” means pregnant girls or women and mothers who were not married, or were widows or were separated from their husbands.
Appointment of Members
(9) The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs has appointed her Honour Judge Yvonne Murphy as Chairperson of the Commission and Dr William Duncan and Prof. Mary E. Daly as members of the Commission.
Commission’s Working Methodology
(10) The Commission shall adopt and implement an appropriate working methodology or framework to ensure that any report required in accordance with the Act is completed within the period specified in Article (5) above.
(11) The methodology or framework to be applied shall include a literature based academic social history module to establish an objective and comprehensive historical analysis of significant matters. The Commission shall, as it considers appropriate, rely on this analysis as evidence to inform its investigations and to assist the Commission in framing its findings and conclusions within the wider social and historical context of the relevant period. This analysis shall detail:
A. Family and societal attitudes and responses to pregnancy and childbirth amongst single women;
B. The role played by religious orders, civil society, the State, families and partners/fathers in relation to single women and their children;
C. The economic and social situation and experiences of single women and their children, including by reference to economic and social circumstances more generally applying;
D. The types of institutional settings (e.g. mother and baby homes, county homes, private nursing homes, homes for infants or children) where single women and their children, or other children, were accommodated;
E. The role and significance of different types of institution and their inter-relationships;
F. Organisational arrangements for the management and operation of these different types of institutions;
G. The involvement of state authorities in legislating for, supporting, financing or regulating different types of institution;
H. The conditions pertaining and the welfare of those accommodated in different types of institution, including by reference to conditions elsewhere and levels of welfare more generally applying;
I. The typical pathways experienced by single women and their children on leaving the different types of such institutions including the role played by other institutions (e.g. adoption societies, homes for infants or children and Magdalen laundries); and
J. This analysis should be informed by the comparative situation in a sample of comparable countries during the relevant period.
(12) The Commission shall, as it considers appropriate, rely on the information and findings from the social history module and such other relevant information as may be available to the Commission, to:
(a) identify a basis for appropriate comparators in its investigations under Article 1(I) to (VIII), and
(b) inform the selection of a representative sample of institutions as per Article 2 of Appendix 1.
(13) The Commission shall exercise discretion in relation to the scope and intensity of the investigation it considers necessary and appropriate, having regard to the general objectives of the investigation, including the need for the investigation to be prompt and thorough in accordance with the State’s obligations under international human rights law.
(14) In performing its functions the Commission should tailor the processes and methodologies to the individual components of its investigations so as to achieve effective investigations in the most timely and cost effective manner possible. In particular the Commission shall have the discretion to use such sampling techniques or selection of samples as it may determine.
(15) In prioritising those issues which should be most urgently addressed in its investigations, the Commission should, in general and as it considers appropriate, take account of relevant information and findings from previous investigations, in particular those investigations already undertaken in the completion of the following Reports:
a. Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse: Interim Reports and Final Report (2009)
b. Report of the Inter-Departmental Committee to establish the facts of State involvement with the Magdalen Laundries (2013)
c. Report on three clinical trials involving children and babies in institutional settings 1960/61, 1970 and 1973: Chief Medical Officer (1997)
d. Report of Dr Deirdre Madden on Post Mortem Practice and Procedures: (2005)
Appendix 1 — Institutions
(1) Mother and Baby Homes as follows:2
1) Ard Mhuire, Dunboyne, Co. Meath;
2) Belmont (Flatlets), Belmont Ave, Dublin 4;
3) Bessboro House, Blackrock, Cork;
4) Bethany Home, originally Blackhall Place, Dublin 7 and from 1934 Orwell Road, Rathgar, Dublin 6;
5) Bon Secours Mother and Baby Home, Tuam, Co. Galway;
6) Denny House, Eglinton Rd, Dublin 4, originally Magdalen Home, 8 Lower Leeson St, Dublin 2;
7) Kilrush, Cooraclare Rd, Co. Clare;
8) Manor House, Castlepollard, Co. Westmeath;
9) Ms. Carr’s (Flatlets), 16 Northbrook Rd, Dublin 6;
10) Regina Coeli Hostel, North Brunswick Street, Dublin 7;
11) Sean Ross Abbey, Roscrea, Co. Tipperary;
12) St. Gerard’s, originally 39, Mountjoy Square, Dublin 1;
13) St. Patrick’s, Navan Road, Dublin 7, originally known as Pelletstown, and subsequent transfer to Eglinton House, Eglinton Rd, Dublin 4; and
14) The Castle, Newtowncunningham, Co. Donegal.
(2) County Homes
A representative sample of those County Homes selected by the Commission as both fulfilling a function with regard to single women and their children similar to the institutions at (1) above and where the extent of the operation of this function is considered to merit their inclusion for the purposes of the investigations set out at Article 1(I) to (VIII) above having regard to factors such as the number of relevant births, the duration of such operations and the typical length of accommodation period of these mothers and children.

I haven't read the report in full yet but based on the Executive Summary and the bit I have read I agree that it has strayed far from the Terms of Reference above.
 

dereko1969

Frequent Poster
Messages
2,838
I only know of one person directly affected by this. In that case it wasn't the church or the state who sent the pregnant teen to the home, it was their parents who did so to avoid the shame and scorn from their neighbours and peers.
But the shame and scorn was set by the Roman Catholic church for the most part with some support from the Church of Ireland.
 
Top