Tuesday, August 25, 2020

The Tuam Babies and the Bon Secours Nuns [2]


Tuam Babies Not Buried in Septic Tank



This is the second in a projected series of three articles on "The Tuam Babies and the Bon Secours Nuns". Part [1] is HERE  

The final report from the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes (chaired by Judge Yvonne Murphy) is now due to be delivered to the Government on 30 October 2020. The Commission was set up in the wake of media claims that the bodies of up to 800 babies and children were buried in a septic tank in the Bon Secours Mother and Baby Home, located in Tuam, County Galway.



TUAM BABIES



[The following is an article by Fr Padraig McCarthy on the website of the Association of Catholic Priests dated June 2014 - plus extracts from Comments ]

Reporting on the Tuam story has often been wild and sensational, and out of touch with known facts.

Brendan O’Neill, whose website describes himself as a Marxist Proletarian Firebrand has a blog on the story of the misreporting at "The Tuam Tank: Another Myth About Evil Ireland" [Subtitle: The obsession with Ireland’s dark past has officially become unhinged. ]

The Tablet this week [June 2014] reports: “Fr Fintan Monaghan, spokesman and archivist for the diocese of Tuam said the diocese’s baptismal register showed that 2,005 children from St Mary’s mother and baby home had been baptised from 1937 to 1961.” 

Proportionately that would mean perhaps around 3000 children were baptised from the Tuam home 1924 – 1961. This, with the 796 recorded deaths, would indicate a mortality rate of about 20% overall. This would need to be related to the national infant mortality rates in those years, and to statistics in other countries.

It seems that mortality rates for what we used to call “illegitimate” children are generally higher in most if not all countries than for children whose parents are married, even today. The reasons for this are unclear. Possible causes may be that the mother did not approach a doctor as early; and the health of the mother may have been be below the average due to poverty in the case of mother and baby homes (better off families could make other arrangements). It would be relevant to know how the funding of the mother and baby homes compared to the funding of maternity hospitals at the time.

Stillbirths in Ireland were not registered until 1995, so a stillborn infant would have neither birth nor death certificate.

The burial of very young infants in the first half of the 20th century in Ireland was not as we do today. They were very often buried in mass graves, like the Holy Angels plot in Glasnevin where over 50,000 infants are buried, and there were no memorials with names. Only in the last 20 years or so has this plot been made more presentable. Poverty was also an important factor in providing a memorial stone on graves. A not uncommon custom was to put the body of a very young infant into the coffin with another burial taking place at the time, with no necessary family connection.

Adoption legislation in Ireland took effect in 1952. We hear stories of adoption of the child of a single mother, where the mother was under such pressure that there was not free consent. This was the case in many other countries as well. Until about the 1980s, adoption was “closed” – no information available which could facilitate later contact between the birth mother and the child. The USA had what is sometimes called the “Baby Scoop Era” (do an internet search).

The question of how to deal with illegitimate births was not just an Irish problem. Social engineering in the form of eugenics was in the fashion in a number of countries. Many European countries, and many states in the USA, had far more draconian measures: compulsory sterilisation of those considered unfit to be parents. In 1927 Oliver Wendell Holmes Jnr., Associate Justice of US Supreme Court, approved for the sterilisation of a young woman who had been raped: “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” Just recently, in May 2014, the California Senate passed Bill 1135 to prevent sterilisation of women prisoners in a coercive prison environment.

There are so many factors to be considered before we can come to a more complete understanding of the matter. Those who dealt with these matters in the past in Ireland faced situations which may be very difficult for us to envisage. The fact that we today may judge that some actions taken were not good does not mean that all those who made those decisions were bad people. We must also keep in mind our present-day situation, where the infant mortality rate for Traveller children is 3.5 times that of the general population, and where our provision for those seeking asylum in Ireland leaves so many in deplorable conditions.

Padraig McCarthy
Fr. Pádraig is a retired priest who has served 42 years in his pastoral work and currently does support work in Balally Parish, Sandyford, South Dublin . He is the author of "Unheard Story: Dublin Archdiocese and the Murphy Report"  that challenges some of the assumptions and assessments of that Report


RESPONSES


Rory Connor June 15th, 2014 at 12:03 pm
Very calm measured response from Padraig McCarthy to another blood libel of a type with which we have become all too familiar in Ireland. He refers to (Marxist firebrand) Brendan O’Neill’s editorial in the Spiked-online website that exposes the lunacy of our latest witch-hunt. A few quotes from O’Neill’s article should be taken to heart before our journalists manage to consign their latest idiocy to the memory hole:

Bodies of 800 babies, long-dead, found in septic tank at former Irish home for unwed mothers’, declared the Washington Post.800 skeletons of babies found inside tank at former Irish home for unwed mothers’, said the New York Daily News. ‘Galway historian finds 800 babies in septic tank grave’, said the Boston Globe. ‘The bodies of 800 babies were found in the septic tank of a former home for unwed mothers in Ireland’, cried Buzzfeed. Commentators angrily demanded answers from the Catholic Church. ‘Tell us the truth about the children dumped in Galway’s mass graves’, said a writer for the Guardian, telling no-doubt outraged readers that ‘the bodies of 796 children… have been found in a disused sewage tank in Tuam, County Galway’.

The subtitle to O’Neill’s article is “The obsession with Ireland’s dark past has officially become unhinged”. Anybody who thinks he is exaggerating should read the article he refers to here
 A hysterical piece in the Irish Independent compared the Tuam home to the Nazi Holocaust, Rwanda and Srebrenica, saying that in all these settings people were killed ‘because they were scum’.”Tuam Babies Cry Not for Justice but for Vengeance" by Emer O'Kelly
Now that this has been transformed into a general investigation of all Mother and Baby homes, the people responsible for the atrocity stories about the Bon Secour nuns in Tuam should not be allowed to fade into the background. They should be questioned about their allegations!

Paddy Ferry June 15th, 2014 at 1:55 pm
Padraig, I do admire your taking on this horrible story and with your usual attention to detail and the relevant statistics. The silence on our ACP site was truly deafening all week. While I accept that we do not know, as yet, the full story, this could yet be the greatest scandal of them all. Just when you think — hope –that the worst must surely be past us now and things cannot possibly get any worse, they actually could get much, much worse. Even if the story remains confined to Tuam and does not eventually include Cork, Tipperary and God knows where else.

I cannot accept any attempt at justification or rationalization that is based on the premise that this kind of thing happened in other counties too — in fact probably was much worse in other countries. Nor does the argument that society as a whole must accept the blame. To a large extent our society was unthinking and uneducated until Donagh O’Malley’s famous stroke of his ministerial pen. Our morals and attitudes were completely moulded by the institutional church and the blame must rest squarely with that institution.

One thing that baffles and bothers me; how come those who were among the “educated” in our country , clergy and religious, seem to have been untouched — to a large extent — by the wonderful good news of the Gospel message of Christ?

I read all the articles in last Sunday’s Sunday Independent on the this awful topic. I had to ask myself; how can we, as a church, ever hope to regain respect among the masses?

Sean O'Conaill June 15th, 2014 at 1:57 pm
This concluding paragraph from Brendan O’Neill’s article in Spiked is worth quoting:
Was the Ireland of yesteryear a sometimes harsh and unpleasant place? Yes. Did the Catholic Church mistreat some of the women and children in its care? Undoubtedly. But the unhealthy obsession over the past 10 years with raking over Ireland’s past has little to do with confirming such facts and instead has become a kind of grotesque moral sport, providing kicks to the anti-Catholic brigade and fuel to the historical self-flagellation that now passes for public life in Ireland. There’s a terrible irony here: in desperately searching for demons that they can hate, in obsessing over evil and its capacity to destroy lives, in frequently substituting speculation for evidence, these history-combing Catholic-bashers employ the very same irrational tactics of demonology and mythmaking once beloved of Ireland’s old Catholic establishment.
History often seems to be process in which one set of brokers of honour and shame is replaced by another. The Irish ‘Catholic establishment’ of the 20th century (never exclusively clerical) has been displaced by a generally secularist and anti-Catholic establishment of the 21st, while the shamed pregnant single woman of the mother-and-baby homes is now replaced by the shamed cleric so often pilloried by the media establishment..........

Rory Connor June 17th, 2014 at 7:21 pm
Paddy
You read all the articles in the Sunday Independent (8 June) about this topic and you wonder how the Catholic Church can regain people’s respect. Does this mean you fully accept the truth of the article which Brendan O’Neill summarised as follows:
A hysterical piece in the Irish Independent compared the Tuam home to the Nazi Holocaust, Rwanda and Srebrenica, saying that in all these settings people were killed ‘because they were scum’.”

I take it you noticed that the Independent journalist specifically REJECTED the term “mass grave”, itself bad enough, and preferred to describe it as a “septic tank” and later as a “cess pit”? Did you also notice that in a separate article in the same newspaper the journalist wrote about the “800 bodies of children SAID to be found BY a septic tank run from 1925 to 1961 by the Good Shepherd Sisters”. [My emphasis and note that she also gets the name of the congregation wrong.]
The Tuam Babies case: An Inhumanity Born of Despair

The second article was presumably written shortly after the first to reflect the fact that the atrocity story was falling apart with great speed. In the Irish Times on the previous day, local historian Catherine Corless said she never used the word “dumped” and never told anyone that 800 bodies were dumped in a septic tank. According to an article in the Sunday Times (Irish edition) by Justine McCarthy on 8 June “The location of the grave in Tuam has been widely reported as the site of a septic tank, but contemporaneous maps show it to have been a water tank”. In fact the whole issue of a “tank” – water or sewage – would appear to be irrelevant. It is clear from the Irish Times report that in 1975 two local boys lifted up a concrete slab and found bones underneath. “In his kitchen, Sweeney demonstrates the the size of the concrete flag as he recalls it; it’s an area little bigger than his coffee table, about 120cm long and 60cm wide.” And later in the article: Would [the tank] have taken up the entire space of what is now known as the unofficial graveyard for the babies who died at the home? “No” [Catherine Corless] says. “Maybe a third of the area.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/tuam-mother-and-baby-home-the-trouble-with-the-septic-tank-story-1.1823393

The claim that Bon Secour nuns dumped the bodies of children in a septic tank is what caused this story to go viral world-wide and caused the Government to order an inquiry. What MAY have happened is that bodies were buried in the general area of what once was a water tank. But these bodies may well have been Famine victims from the previous century – which is what the Gardai appear to believe! (More on this later). It is grotesque for people to use this non-scandal as a means of expressing their hatred of the Catholic Church. It is also an insult to the dead – whether Famine victims OR children from the home.

Rory Connor June 17th, 2014 at 9:40 pm
I wrote above: “What MAY have happened is that bodies were buried in the general area of what once was a water tank.” I just came across the following from a Daily Mail article on 2 June
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2645870/Mass-grave-contains-bodies-800-babies-site-Irish-home-unmarried-mothers.html
The babies were usually buried in a plain shroud without a coffin in a plot that had housed a WATER TANK attached to the workhouse that preceded the mother and child home. [My Emphasis]

This ties in with the Sunday Times article on 8 June but the TITLE of the Daily Mail article is still “Mass Septic Tank Grave ‘containing the Skeletons of 800 Babies’ at site of Irish Home for Unmarried Mothers“. Our journalists appear to be amending their atrocity stories on the hoof!

Of course I appreciate that local historian Catherine Corless is upset by the way she was misquoted by a hysterical mass media. However the article in the Irish Times on Saturday 7 June also had this curious paragraph:
When Corless was researching the home she looked at old maps of Tuam. One was an 1840 Ordnance Survey map that shows the then workhouse. At the rear of the site is a space she believes to be the sewage tank for the workhouse, although it is not labelled as such. Later maps have “sewage tank” written in the same space. But there is confusion about what dates these maps relate to. One map Corless shows The Irish Times is dated 1892. It describes the building on the site as “Children’s Home”, but in 1892 the building was a workhouse. It did not become a home until 1925. Corless had not noticed this until her attention was drawn to it.
It is extra-ordinary that she did not notice this discrepancy. The 1892 map is presumably that shown in Philip Boucher-Hayes blog here
http://philipboucher-hayes.com/2014/06/04/tuam-babies-the-evidence/#comments
and HE doesn’t comment on the discrepancy either! He does quote a reply the Gardai sent him:
Hello Philip.The grounds in Tuam were being surveyed in 2012 and bones were found, they are historical burials going back to Famine times, there is no suggestion of any impropriety and there is no Garda investigation. Also there is no confirmation from any source that there are between 750 and 800 bodies present.
Boucher-Hayes goes on to state that The location of that site [of the Famine era bones] is about 100 yards away from the septic tank burial site. So the Gardaí are misinformed on this or have decided to find a reason not to investigate any closer.
[My Emphasis: Perhaps the Gardai are afraid of a belt of the crozier?]

In his latest post dated 12 June he does concede that at least one of the two plots possibly used by the Bon Secours nuns was not a septic tank as previously thought and also "But the most significant aspect to this information is this – whatever cruelties you could lay at the nuns feet, however harsh or medically incompetent the regime they ran was, it was always hard to believe that they would have knowingly put babies in a septic tank."
http://philipboucher-hayes.com/2014/06/

Well now THAT is a great relief. The trouble is that the Government inquiry is set to include all Mother and Baby homes, plus issues about Adoption, Vaccinations etc. So are the people who published atrocity stories about the nuns dumping babies in septic tanks, going to be questioned about their allegations? I suspect that the Investigation Report will ignore all the OBVIOUS lies and accept as true any claim that the Bon Secour nuns cannot PROVE are false. Since all the Sisters who worked in the Tuam Home are now safely deceased, my fear is that they will be demonised by the same kind of people who published the “babies in the septic tank” atrocity stories.

Paddy Ferry June 18th, 2014 at 12:22 am
Rory, I have to say fair play to you, you have mounted a strong and well-researched defence and I sincerely hope you are right and this is just a sensationalist false alarm. I say that even though I feel Fr. Gerard Maloney’s reaction (in the most recent article above)  to the “maybe” scandal is a better approach and one that I would empathise with more. However, you obviously feel strongly that the church is being unfairly treated. The article with the reference to “scum” may well have been the piece written by Gene Kerrigan. Now, I cannot check it because even in this high tech, digital age I receive my Sunday Independent on Tuesday and I pass it on to my Tipperary born mother in law on Friday. So, I don’t have it now. However, I have to say I greatly admire Gene Kerrigan. He is an excellent journalist as are many of his colleagues and he has been my first port of call when I get the paper and his analysis of, not just the church, but bankers and politicians as well, over the years has been excellent, in my opinion.

I have just had a quick look at Sunday’s paper which came to-day and the piece by Eilis O’Hanlon on victimhood seems very reasonable and mature. And, Rory, you know as well as I do that young women who had a child outside marriage were looked upon as scum at home in Ireland and were frequently denounced as such from the altar. And, with all due respect to you, Rory, I feel we would do better to be exercised more by the terrible attitudes and treatment– definitely unchristian — young, unmarried women and their children received in our native land not so very long ago

Joe O'Leary June 18th, 2014 at 4:20 am
The terrible treatment unmarried mothers received is quite a different thing from how mother-and-baby homes handled the great number of mothers and babies confided to their care by the state and by the families. In the case of the Tuam home it is quite possible that the Bon Secours nuns are guilty of no wrongdoing whatsoever. The dangerous overcrowding of the home was probably not their choice. The death rate was lower than in most such homes (about 20%, as opposed to 90% in some US homes). The babies were given respectful burial in a vault grave (coffins were purchased from a local dealer). Contrary to the Daily Mail (aka the Daily Insult, says Salman Rushdie), the children were properly baptised. Why were the children not buried in the Holy Angels plot in the nearby cemetery? Could it be that that the locals did not want their children’s bones mixed with those of the unwanted?

As to the treatment of Irish unmarried mothers today, Fintan O’Toole has pointed to our huge abortion rates. As to non-Irish mothers and babies in Ireland, there are other 
questions to be asked.

Des Gilroy June 18th, 2014 at 2:59 pm
Thanks to Padraig McCarthy for his balanced piece on the story emerging from the Tuam mother and baby home over the past fortnight. Regrettably, too many commentators have gone overboard on this particular home and it is very hard for the public now to separate fact from exaggeration. A public enquiry has now been promised and the calls for its enlargement to take account of many other institutions makes one wonder whether this will ever get off the ground........

What is unhelpful at this moment is the media hysteria with the various commentators coming to their conclusions before the facts are known. We do know that shock horror stories sell newspapers and whip up tv and radio ratings but some of the comments made by people who should be more responsible have been very surprising. It was most disappointing, therefore, to hear one of our national treasures, Brian D’Arcy, referring to Tuam as “an atrocity” , “a serious crime” and finally referring to it “as shockable as something that happened in Germany in the war.” This latter comment has now been misrepresented in this weeks “Northside News” as Brian “ drawing parallels with Nazi Germany”. I am sure Brian never intended to equate the Bon Secours with the Nazis but it just shows how careful high profile leaders should be with their language.

Eddie Finnegan June 19th, 2014 at 8:30 am
As always, thanks to Pádraig McCarthy for attempting to place all this in the context of “not just an Irish problem” (his penultimate paragraph above). Thanks, too, to Des Gilroy@12 for his rational pursuit of “the facts”.

Vincent Twomey SVD has an Opinion piece in this morning’s Irish Times which, I’m sure, deserves reproduction on this site: “Catholic Church should set up its own commission of investigation following mother and child home controversy.”

His additional suggestion: “Government commission should be chaired by someone of evident distinction who is not Irish or of Irish extraction.”

[I realise that an appearance by Vincent Twomey on the ACP website may be something of a culture shock for both parties  ]

Association of Catholic Priests June 19th, 2014 at 8:40 am
Link to Irish Times article by Vincent Twomey SVD
Catholic Church should set up its own commission of investigation following mother and child home controversy

Joe O'Leary June 19th, 2014 at 10:33 am
Thanks to Vincent Twomey for insisting on historical perspective. Another good article is: http://americamagazine.org/content/all-things/galway-horror-part-ii

Des Gilroy June 19th, 2014 at 6:06 pm
As is his wont, Sean O’Conaill has penned a very thoughtful and cogently argued piece on the ACI website which is very relevant to this discussion on the Tuam Babies case. I would commend it to all.
The link is http://www.acireland.ie/honour-and-shame-and-irelands-culture-war-sean-oconaill/

Rory Connor June 21st, 2014 at 10:18 pm
There are interesting articles in (the Jesuit) America Magazine and in Forbes Magazine by Kevin Clarke and Eamonn Fingleton respectively regarding this fake scandal. I see that these critical commentators have succeeded in extracting apologies (or “clarifications”) for some of the most disgusting allegations – or at any rate for such allegations that can be readily disproved. This is Kevin Clarke in his Second and Third third articles on the subject:
The Galway Horror Part II [Kevin Clarke, 18 June 2014]

Babies born inside the institutions were denied baptism and, if they died from the illness and disease rife in such facilities, also denied a Christian burial.”
It is a sentence, unattributed to any source, which repeats—either word for word or in a close approximation—in HUNDREDS [My emphasis RC] of articles concerning the now infamous deaths and burials of hundreds of children in Tuam, Galway between 1925 and 1961. This appalling sacramental indifference is referenced in major U.S. and U.K. publications and cited in leading online opinion journals like Salon as more evidence of the cruelty of the Bon Secours sisters who ran the home and the Catholic Church in Ireland in general.
Associated Press Issues Correction Based on America Query [Kevin Clarke, 20 June 2014]
After our June 18 report on baptismal certificates recorded in Tuam, I queried the Associated Press regarding their stories on the Tuam Mothers and Babies Home.
Today AP issued the following correction:
Ireland-Children’s Mass Graves storyDUBLIN (AP) — In stories published June 3 and June 8 about young children buried in unmarked graves after dying at a former Irish orphanage for the children of unwed mothers, The Associated Press incorrectly reported that the children had not received Roman Catholic baptisms; documents show that many children at the orphanage were baptized. The AP also incorrectly reported that Catholic teaching at the time was to deny baptism and Christian burial to the children of unwed mothers; although that may have occurred in practice at times it was not church teaching. In addition, in the June 3 story, the AP quoted a researcher who said she believed that most of the remains of children who died there were interred in a disused septic tank; the researcher has since clarified that without excavation and forensic analysis it is impossible to know how many sets of remains the tank contains, if any. The June 3 story also contained an incorrect reference to the year that the orphanage opened; it was 1925, not 1926.
It is interesting that Forbes the famous business magazine, which has NO connection with the Church, has published two highly skeptical articles about this witch-hunt. The second one by Eamonn Fingleton is here:
796 Babies In A Septic Tank": Does An Anti-Catholic Bias Help Explain This Hoax?

I recall that several years ago, Forbes published a long and highly sarcastic article about people making child abuse compensation claims based on decades old “memories” which they had suddenly “recovered”. In that case, I believe that Forbes were worried about the implications for the American Insurance industry but that issue hardly arises here! 

However it may be worth recalling that journalists on the Wall Street Journal were instrumental in discrediting the Satanic Ritual Abuse craze in the 1990s. Evidently, BUSINESS journalists are less likely to believe in witches and witch-hunts!

Pádraig McCarthy June 23rd, 2014 at 9:36 am
An interesting snippet from the Enda Kenny interview with Gay Byrne (22 June), “The Meaning of Life”. The Taoiseach’s mother gave birth to triplets who died: two died before she returned home, and one a few days later. These were buried (in two different locations), and it appears that they were laid to rest in unmarked graves. This was just how this was normally dealt with at the time. It was not a matter of poverty or neglect. The father of the children was a prominent GAA player, and the mother had worked for Fianna Fáil and RTÉ.

Memorials were erected just a few years before the death of the Taoiseach’s mother in 2011.

Rory Connor June 28th, 2014 at 12:14 am
As this particular discussion seems to be coming to an end, maybe it’s time to put it into perspective. The following is based on comments I made to an article in The New Republic by Jason Walsh:
That Story About Irish Babies Buried in a Septic Tank Was Shocking. It Also Wasn't Entirely True.
(Incidentally it’s remarkable how SOME secular and Marxist style publications have denounced the atrocity stories while our senior clerics grovel before the accusers)
This fake atrocity story is the latest in a series of grotesque claims that began in 1997 with a claim that a Sister of Mercy had murdered a baby girl by burning holes in the baby’s legs with a red hot poker. However at least that baby existed and actually died. This claim was followed by a long series of similar blood libels against the Christian Brothers – some of which related to periods when no boy died of ANY cause. Accordingly I coined the phrases “Murder of the Undead” and “Victimless Murders” – try Googling these. …….. the Blood Libels were published/broadcast by our “intellectual” Irish Times, our best-selling Irish Independent, the state broadcasting company RTE and the independent broadcaster TV3.
…… for those who want to sample Ireland’s history of hysterical allegations against Catholic religious see Letter to Sunday Tribune re Child-Killing Allegations” where I attempted to give a summary of the child-killing claims up to 2006.(There have been more since then).
At the time I actually forgot the one about the murderous nun with the hot poker but you can find the story here: Hot Poker Was Used on Little Marion
Note the title of the UK Mirror article "HOT POKER WAS USED ON LITTLE MARION.. NO CASH WILL GET HER BACK; I THINK MY BABY WAS MURDERED AT THE ORPHANAGE, SAYS PAYOUT MUM."
How did I manage to forget this when I was doing my summary article in 2006? Because the torrent of lunatic claims is so huge that it overwhelms you. The “babies bodies in a septic tank” is just the latest in a long and demented series!

Paddy Ferry June 29th, 2014 at 5:50 pm
Rory,
This is definitely my last word on this topic — I am not even sure what is the main issue we are discussing now. It may be — sensationalist and inaccurate reporting aimed at damaging the Catholic Church in Ireland. That would not be my take on this, Rory. It would be hard to make some of these stories more sensational than they already are. However, my main reason for responding to you is because I am puzzled as to why you gave us the link to the piece in the Mirror concerning the treatment of Christine Buckley and the child, Marion Howe in Goldenbridge. You are surely not calling into question the harrowing accounts that Christine gave of the treatment she and others were subjected to. I did not see the original interview when Christine Buckley appeared on the “Late Late” nor did I see the subsequent documentary. However, when she passed away earlier this year, I read quite a bit about Christine who was obviously an incredible woman who had the courage to speak out not just for herself but for all the others who experienced similar brutality in Goldenbridge.

However, when I read or hear the word “Goldenbridge”I do not think immediately of Christine but of the little child, Marion, who, sadly, did not live to tell her story.

Rory, I would not trust British tabloidism either but I would trust –yes indeed — the Sunday Independent, and it was in the Sunday Inde that I first read about Marion Howe. It is some years since I first read the story and my memory of some of the details may be a bit hazy. At the time it made a major impact on me. As I remember it, Marion’s Dad had gone to England to look for work and a short time later her Mum became ill. There were four children at that stage and they were all taken into care,– Marion to Goldenbridge. 

Sometime later she died. Her father came home and saw Marion in the mortuary and saw evidence of injury/wounding to the child’s leg. He subsequently made a request to see the death certificate which had mysteriously disappeared. He then went to the Gaurds and the Guard he spoke to told him he would be as well forgetting all about it. As far as I can remember, the family took no further action at that time.If anyone feels that any of this is not accurate then I stand to be corrected.

Rory, I have to say to you that defending the indefensible does not do our Church any favours nor does it bring any credit on ourselves. I am as concerned as anybody about the damage that has been inflicted — self-inflicted – on our Church and I am equally concerned about our prospects of regaining some respect and credibility. However, I would respectfully suggest that we would be better employed focusing on the ill-treatment and brutality inflicted on the weakest and poorest in our country by those who should have been influenced more by the Gospel of justice and love rather than continually fussing about the reporting of the atrocities, sensationalist or otherwise.

Rory Connor June 30th, 2014 at 12:06 am
Paddy,
One major reason I mentioned the 1997 “Hot Poker Was Used On Little Marion” atrocity story is that it bears some resemblance to the stories being published and broadcast about the Bon Secour nuns in Tuam e.g. claims that they allowed children to starve to death, buried the bodies in a septic tank and that the Church refused to baptise the children of unmarried mothers. For example today’s Sunday World has a story subtitled “Councillor Seeking Justice For ‘Murder’ of Babies” about People Before Profit councillor Deirdre Wadding. The following is an extract:

Deirdre said that what was happening to single mothers in Ireland even in the 1980s was a form of “torture”. “In later years, there was brutality, what you would call torture,” she said, describing the babies bodies found in the septic tank in Tuam as “nothing short of murder”. “Children seem to have been allowed to die. No doubt the cracks will uncover as time goes on and we can be sure if it happened in Tuam it happened elsewhere. We have to seek justice. Somebody has to be responsible for this. ……If that means individuals being brought to court, jail sentences, whatever it means, we cannot hold back”.

Another woman describes a “sinister scene” in the Good Shepherd convent in New Ross in 1964.
I saw a baby in a nun’s arms and blood dripping along the floor. I saw another nun standing with a shovel in her hand. I was a 12 year old. I knew they were going out to do something, or dig a hole for that child but nobody would listen to me.”

This is very much in line with the “Hot Poker was Used on Little Marion Story”. I don’t know the Sunday Independent article you refer to, but the allegation was dealt with in an article in the Sunday Times (Irish Edition) on 28 April 1996 – article entitled
Medical View ‘Inconsistent’ with Goldenbridge Abuse

……. One of the more chilling allegations to surface was that an 11-month-old baby died four days after she was put into Goldenbridge. When the infant’s father, Myles Howe. returned from England and went to St Ultan’s hospital, he was told by a nurse that his baby had burns on her knees but the staff had got her too late to save her. The postmortem said the child died of dysentery.The Howes have never been satisfied by the official response.
[Doctor] Prendiville [1] recalls that St Ultan’s was established largely for dealing with bowel complaints such as dysentery or gastroenteritis, a common illness among children which at that time could reach epidemic proportions in Dublin. He speculated that Marian Howe was more than likely admitted to St Ultan’s with a bowel complaint. “I wouldn’t say that burns of that size on a child’s legs would have been the cause of death. They didn’t treat burns in St Ultan’s. If the baby died from a burn, there would have to be an inquest. But failure to communicate information is a defect in many hospitals,” he said.
But if the burns were not the cause of Marian’s death, asks Howe, why was he told by Xavieria that it was an “accident” and not dysentery that killed his child? Why, on his arrival at St Ultan’s to see his dead child, did a nurse indicate to him that his daughter had died of burns? And why could nobody explain to him the large burn marks on the sides of her knees?
The outrage that followed the Prime Time programme was directed as much at Xavieria’s denials of abuse as at an apparently “soft” line of questioning. The allegation that a baby in her charge died of burns was not put to her on the programme. The reason was that after researching the allegation, the Prime Time team could find no evidence to support it. according to an RTE source. The reporter did ask Xavieria about the incident, he said, but her response was edited out of the programme. [Emphasis is mine RC]
[1] Doctor J. B. Prendiville was a senior surgeon who worked at the hospital where children from Goldenbridge were treated during the 1950s.

It wasn’t only Prime Time that failed to find any evidence to support the allegation – neither did the Gardai. This is despite the fact that the original “Dear Daughter” documentary contained allegations that could easily be checked even decades later.

Christine Buckley [on my website IrishSalem.com ]
In the words of Irish Times journalist Eddie Holt (writing on 24 February 1996) “Christine Buckley was once beaten so badly by the unidentified Sister Sadist of the Shining Stick that she had to get about 100 stitches in her leg. On another occasion, perhaps too tired from walking up a flight of stairs, Stick just poured a kettle of boiling water over 10 year old Christine’s right thigh”.

Perhaps the Gardai did not investigate because they were afraid of a belt of the crozier? The child-killing and related allegations were also omitted from the Ryan Report published in 2009. Was Judge Ryan also afraid of the Bishops?

It is very important that the forthcoming investigation into the Mother and Baby Homes DOES produce a Report that deals with the allegations that have been made, especially the ones that can actually be proved/disproved even decades later e.g. child-killing and burials in a septic tank.

Joe O'Leary June 30th, 2014 at 6:33 am
Paddy Ferry, in the Tuam Babies scandal what “atrocities” were committed? The state authorities seem to have been well aware of mortality rates in these homes (more than matched in other countries) and vault burial of children must also have been known.

Joe O'Leary June 30th, 2014 at 7:07 am
In the case of the baby Marion Howe it is not clear that an “atrocity” occurred either:
“In a statement read to the court yesterday, the Sisters of Mercy said: “We, the Sisters of Mercy, accept that Marion had a burn to her leg at the time of her death and died of acute dysentery infection. We have been unable to establish how this burn occurred.”

“The statement continued: “We, the Sisters of Mercy, wish to express our deep sorrow to Myles and Christina Howe for the anguish and distress they experienced on and since the death of their baby daughter, Marion, while in our care in May 1955.”

“”We also wish to express our sorrow and regret if there was any lack of courtesy and compassion at that time,” it added.”

Afterword 25 August 2020

The Statement by the Sisters of Mercy referred to above by Fr Joe O'Leary was made in October 1997 - as per Irish Times article "Goldenbridge Nuns to Pay £20,000" I understand that the Sisters subsequently discovered a record showing that when baby Marion Howe was in her crib, a child thought that she looked cold and put in a hot water bottle that was too hot and caused a small burn. This would tie in with the statement by Dr Prendiville that I quoted in my last Comment above
"I wouldn’t say that burns of that size on a child’s legs would have been the cause of death. They didn’t treat burns in St Ultan’s."

As per the Irish Times article:
 Marion was visited by the orphanage doctor, Dr Dillon, who examined her and referred her to St Ultan's Hospital, the statement said. The child died on May 21st, 1955, and a post-mortem was held two days later. The coroner for the city of Dublin certified that Marion had died of acute dysentery infection.














Wednesday, August 19, 2020

‘Many People Were Damaged By Carl Beech’




‘Many people were damaged by Carl Beech’

Carl Beech ruined lives with fake accusations of sex abuse. Why? Vanessa Engle, the director of a new film about him, explains


Monday August 17 2020, 12.01am, The Times

Vanessa Engle, director of The Unbelievable Story of Carl Beech


Vanessa Engle has built a reputation on asking straight questions about knotty subjects. Engle’s television documentaries on the art world, Jews, lefties, Harley Street and domestic violence have been marked out by humanity, curiosity and her disarming, direct interviewing style. The British journalist’s new film, though, is perhaps the most disturbing of her 30-year career. The Unbelievable Story of Carl Beech is one of those rare titles that’s not an exaggeration.

In 2012 Beech, a hospital inspector in his forties from Gloucester, claimed to police that he had been abused, raped and tortured as a boy in the late Seventies and early Eighties by a paedophile ring that included the politicians Edward Heath, Leon Brittan and Harvey Proctor and the senior army officer Lord Bramall. Beech, referred to by the police as “Nick” to protect his identity, also said that he witnessed members of that ring murder three boys and that he had been abused by his stepfather. “I had poppies pinned to my chest whilst they did whatever they wanted to do,” he says of the “VIP ring” in a police interview. That would normally begin with him being forced to perform oral sex, he adds, “but would always culminate in being raped”.

As Proctor said in an incendiary press conference at the time, Beech’s claims amounted to “just about the worst allegations anyone can make against another person”. Yet, after an 18-month investigation that cost £2.5 million and put huge stress on the accused men — Proctor lost his job and home — not a single arrest had been made. The allegations were completely fabricated. Last year Beech, who had been awarded more than £20,000 in compensation for non-existent injuries suffered in the alleged abuse, was tried and sentenced to 18 years in prison for offences including fraud and perverting the course of justice.

Carl Beech (left) in Court 2018


And yet his unbelievable story was at first widely believed in a country that was reeling from Jimmy Savile’s crimes. Victims of abuse were being listened to like never before. In the police interviews Beech looks plausibly nervous, vulnerable, damaged. 
“We were at a moment where people would believe literally anything on this subject,” Engle, 57, says by phone from her home in north London. “The press believed it, politicians believed it, police believed it, the public believed it. There are still people saying, ‘Oh, no smoke without fire. It must be true.’ ”
Except in this case it wasn’t. Beech, it is clear now, is a fantasist on a grand scale. If notes read out in the film are anything to go by, he is also a dreadful poet. “Electrocution and drowning were some of the tools/ They used when I broke the rules,” he wrote. “They used snakes and wasps/ Or left me out there to die in the frost.”
“Well he obviously didn’t die, did he, because he’s alive and still in prison, for f***’s sake,” says his ex-wife, Dawn Beech, in the film. She is a peach of an interviewee — candid, courageous and funny — which is extraordinary, given her travails. Her sex life with Beech, she tells Engle, “just wasn’t good at all”. 
Another interviewee is Mark Conrad, a journalist who was taken in by Beech. “Some people have probably assumed that Beech took you for a fool,” Engle says to Conrad. See what I mean about direct? “I’m a very direct person,” she says. “I did ten years of therapy and that gave me the tools to be very aware of what’s happening in the room when I ask questions and what it’s possible to ask. You know you’ve done a good interview if you know you’ve taken a risk in some of your questions.”
Nevertheless, she says she was nervous about making this documentary. “Why would I spend time on somebody who was not a real victim, as far as we know, and who had inflicted so much damage to the real victims? Normally, the more you familiarise yourself with stories, the less strange they become, but with this one Carl’s motivation just seemed stranger and more despicable to me.”
What was that motivation? Engle thinks there may have been a past trauma. “You just have to look at him. He does not look comfortable in his own skin, does he?” When police searched Beech’s home they found substantial amounts of child pornography, the possession of which contributed to his prison sentence. While there is no evidence that Beech was abused, Mike Pierce — an anti-abuse charity worker and survivor of child sexual abuse who appears in the film — met him and felt that he had been. “So, I can’t categorically say that he wasn’t,” Engle says. “I don’t know how bad a thing has to happen to someone to send them off the rails.”
The film ended up becoming an examination of the damage that Beech has done. “There was just wave upon wave,” she says. “We all understood that the falsely accused were very damaged, but I hadn’t really realised that Beech’s own family was damaged too. The family of his step-siblings has been really badly damaged. I hadn’t understood that the journalists [who covered the case] were damaged.”
Conrad talks about the long period of depression he went through when Beech was found to be a liar. “I know that some of the police who were fooled have had breakdowns as well,” Engle says.
She coaxes brilliant details out of people, punctuating the grimness with off-kilter interludes. Brittan’s widow and housekeeper talk about the police searching the house. “The thing that hurt the lady more than anything — they took his slippers,” the housekeeper says. “Were they nice slippers?” Engle asks. “They were pretty awful, to be honest,” Diana Brittan replies. “No monogram.” 
This is ultimately, Engle says, “a film about truth. Which, of course, is very relevant in the post-truth era.” In the age of Trump and Johnson, will fantasists like Beech become more common? “That’s a terrifying thought,” she says. There have always been fantasists, she points out. Her previous film, The $50m Art Swindle, was about Michel Cohen, a Frenchman who made a fortune by selling Picassos and Monets that he didn’t own. “He was a conman and a very deluded person too. We all have a tiny strain of deluded thinking. That’s not always a bad thing. It’s what makes people have dreams and grand ambitions.”
It’s hard to put a positive spin on Beech’s case, though. What’s most heartbreaking is how much damage it has done to the cause of genuine abuse victims. “We just were at a moment where the victims of historic child sexual abuse were coming forward and were being believed,” she says. “What kind of a person would want to get in the way of that?”
Engle asked Beech for an interview, but he refused. “We’d have loved to ask him why he did it. But when you see his extraordinary performance in those police videos, I don’t think you could whip off the mask and the real Carl Beech would step forward.”
Does she think he feels any remorse? “From everything I know and from everything I’ve heard from those closest to him, no, he doesn’t,” Engle says. “He’s never said, ‘I made it up.’ He really does seem to believe what he’s saying.”

The Unbelievable Story of Carl Beech is on BBC Two on August 24 at 9pm


Monday, August 17, 2020

The Tuam Babies and the Bon Secours Nuns [1]

Nuns, Mothers and Babies in Bon Secours Home, Tuam



The final report from the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes (chaired by Judge Yvonne Murphy) was due to be delivered to the Government in June but delivery was postponed until 30 October 2020 due to coronavirus. According to the Irish Times  "It was set up following claims that up to 800 babies may have been interred in an unmarked mass grave in the Bon Secours mother-and-baby home in Tuam, Co Galway." That's putting it very mildly. Brendan O'Neill editor of Spiked OnLine gives a flavour of the wordwide hysteria that preceded the establishment of the Commission (June 2004 article The Tuam Tank: Another Myth about Evil Ireland

Bodies of 800 babies, long-dead, found in septic tank at former Irish home for unwed mothers’, declared the Washington Post. ‘800 skeletons of babies found inside tank at former Irish home for unwed mothers’, said the New York Daily News. ‘Galway historian finds 800 babies in septic tank grave’, said the Boston Globe. ‘The bodies of 800 babies were found in the septic tank of a former home for unwed mothers in Ireland’, cried Buzzfeed. Commentators angrily demanded answers from the Catholic Church. ‘Tell us the truth about the children dumped in Galway’s mass graves’, said a writer for The Guardian, telling no-doubt outraged readers that ‘the bodies of 796 children… have been found in a disused sewage tank in Tuam, County Galway


I discuss the credibility of three preceding Reports including two chaired by the same Judge Yvonne Murphy.

This is the first in a projected series of three articles on "The Tuam Babies and the Bon Secours Nuns". Part [2] is HERE and Part [3] HERE


(A) Credibility of Ryan Report (Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse), May 2009


The Report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes chaired by Judge Yvonne Murphy is due to be published shortly. I gave evidence myself to the Ryan Commission (Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse) as part of a delegation from Let Our Voices Emerge. I emphasised the clearly bogus allegations of child murder made by leaders of "Victim" groups against the Christian Brothers and Sisters of Mercy. The Ryan Report was published in May 2009 and  I outlined my experience in a letter published in the Irish Examiner on 7 November 2011 Ryan Report Did Not Deal With False Allegations  
The report of the Ryan Commission published in May 2009 makes no reference to these claims of unlawful killing. Originally I thought that the commission had ignored them completely. It now appears that the commission did investigate the allegations in private session, found no evidence to support them and took a deliberate decision to omit them from its published report. I find this reprehensible.
 I did not give evidence to the Commission of Investigation, Dublin Archdiocese or the Commission of Investigation, Cloyne Diocese - both of which were chaired by Judge Yvonne Murphy - Reports published in November 2009 and July 2011 respectively. However the modus operandi of Judge Yvonne Murphy seems to be similar to that of Judge Sean Ryan - including ignoring evidence of false allegations and accepting as true any claim that Church authorities cannot prove false!


(B) Credibility of Murphy Report into Dublin Archdiocese, November 2009


I am not the only one to have such misgivings. This is a Statement by The Association of Catholic Priests in July 2014 on the appointment of Judge Yvonne Murphy to chair the current Commission. 

Statement from the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP) responding to the  establishment of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes and the appointment of Yvonne Murphy 
The ACP welcomes the establishment of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes. It is important that it be carried out competently, justly and in strict accordance with guidelines to be laid down by the government, which should reflect natural and constitutional justice.
The ACP notes the appointment of Judge Yvonne Murphy who chaired the Murphy Commission into abuse in Dublin diocese. It is also important to note that, in view of a report commissioned by the ACP into procedural fairness in that investigation, Fergal Sweeney, an Irish barrister who worked for many years as a judge in Hong Kong, concluded that the Murphy Report contained significant deficiencies in terms of respecting the demands of natural and constitutional justice.
Last October [2013], the ACP published Fergal Sweeney’s findings. His conclusions are on pages 37-39 of his document, which is on this web-site. The final point is as follows:
4.14   However, from the legal perspective it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that insofar as the Catholic clerics who were called to testify were concerned, the practices and procedures of the Murphy Commission fell far short of meeting the concerns of the Law Reform Commission and, more importantly, of natural and Constitutional  justice. 
In the light of the serious failings of the Murphy Commission, the ACP suggests that Fergal Sweeney’s important and robustly argued conclusions should be considered before the terms of reference for the investigation are established and the necessity of following them is accepted.  
Our concerns should not be interpreted as an attack on Judge Murphy, still less an attempt to obstruct the investigation, but a concern that the new Commission of Investigation should have the best possible team to carry out the vital work. 
The ACP is aware that Judge Murphy and the Murphy Commission are legally debarred from any comment once they issued their Report but even though strangely Fergal Sweeney’s study was largely ignored in the media and by the legal profession, it is vital for the credibility of the enquiry that those entrusted with investigating the Mother and Baby Homes should accept and implement the guidelines laid down by the government. This is a matter not just of natural justice but of judicial competence. 
We would also hope that the Commission will avail of the expertise of social scientists, especially anthropologists, to make sure that the cultural prism through which we interpret present reality is not imposed on the past. Here too competent historians must be consulted so that the Commission has an accurate understanding of the historical reality at that period in Irish history and of the various actors who were involved in the wider context of the Mother and Child homes at the time. 
Making the same mistakes twice, when people’s characters and reputations are at stake, would be unconscionable.
A discussion regarding Fergal Sweeney’s report can be found on the ACP website at 

The text of Fergal Sweeney's 40 page Report is here

Margaret Lee a retired Social Worker and former member of the Sisters of Mercy summarised it thus in the course of the afore-mentioned discussion 

I have read this review and I consider the following to be the salient Points

  • 1. The enquiry that led to the Murphy Report was carried out under the 2004 [Commissions of Investigation] Act which was really guided by the Law Reform Commission Report of 2003. This report proposes a low key enquiry that would focus on the malfunction of the system not on the sins of the individual. It was viewed that such an enquiry would not attract the rules of constitutional justice precisely because the focus was to be on the system, not the individual. Two further recommendations of the LRC Report are pertinent: (a) the enquiry was to be held in private –again to protect the good name of the participants and (b) where a participant wished to comment on or disagree with the conclusions of the enquiry, such comments and/or disagreements would be included in the final report—in short both sides of the argument would be recorded. The Murphy Report does not meet the standards set out by the Law Reform because it names and blames individual clerics.
  • 2. The legislation itself could be viewed as flawed and the Dail debates at the time foresaw the possibility of a legal challenge. The legislation does not make provision for an enquiry that might find a reason to go beyond the remit of focussing on a system and start adjudicating of individuals. If it had done so, it would surely have written into the legislation the 4 minimum rights which the Supreme Court set down in its Abbeylara judgement–right to know the content of the accusation, to cross examine the accuser, to address the adjudicator through counsel and make a rebuttal. Instead the legislation talks vaguely about “fair procedures” without stating how these fair provisions might be implemented.
  • 3. The Murphy Report did not accord natural justice to the clerics who participated. Where there is a difference in the recollections of past events between clerics and professionals it resolves such differences in favour of the professionals and against the cleric and, most significantly, does not give any reason for doing so. The report does not give due consideration to any mitigating circumstances put forward by the clerics. This is particularly obvious in discussing the “learning curve”. The report dismisses out of hand that the clergy were on a learning curve when it came to child sexual abuse but freely acknowledges the existence of such a learning curve in the case of An Garda Siochana and Social workers—or indeed, psychiatrists.
  • 4. The LRC places great emphasis on the limitations of any form of enquiry or tribunal when it comes to the administration of justice. It states that an enquiry is not able to carry out a function which belongs to the courts—that of punishment and it warns against the danger of attempting to do so in times of a public outcry.
This review of the Murphy report is not attempting to deny or minimize the wrong that was done to the victims of clerical child abuse. What the review is stating is that the clergy did not get natural justice. It is important to draw attention to this in a week when we have heard a lot of concern about targeting any particular group.

I find the silence of the named Bishops and of the members of the Law Reform Commission at the time of publication puzzling. I assume that the Bishops were terrified of savaging by the media. Why did not the members of the LRC not speak out?.....

Finally, there is no substitute for a formal statement of complaint to An Garda Siochana in the event of sexual assault or any other crime.


(C) Extracts from Discussion that followed ACP Statement on appointment of Yvonne Murphy (July 2014) 


Pádraig McCarthy July 18th, 2014 at 10:24 pm 
At the risk of increasing the task, it is important that the Commission of Investigation do not consider the religious run mother and baby homes in isolation: other such homes, including county homes, must be included. In relation to funding and staffing, the Commission must see how such homes which were funded by the state compare in funding to other kinds of homes, and to the regular maternity hospitals.

The matter of children being sent for adoption, and of children who died being sent to medical schools, must be looked at in all such institutions.

In looking at the matter of how society dealt with non-marital children and their mothers (what about the fathers?), the Commission must look at the context of how other jurisdictions at the time dealt with this. This would include the practice in some places of introducing legislation for the compulsory sterilisation of women in these situations.

In dealing with infant mortality, the Commission must look at how other institutions, including maternity hospitals, dealt with the burial arrangements; and how society at the time dealt with the deaths of small children – this includes the “Holy Angels” plots in many parts of the country as a normal practice. While today, we would see the burial of a child without a funeral rite as cruel and unfeeling, we need to ask how people saw it in the years before and following independence, including the question of whether it was seen as a kindness and help to the bereaved parents. The economic factors are relevant here. Also the fact that stillbirths were not registered here until 1995, so the child would not usually be given a name.

The level of infant mortality in society over those years is clearly important. Where there appears to be a much higher level of mortality of non-marital children, the Commission must look at the health and living conditions of the mothers; the question of poverty is relevant. The Commission must consider the experience in other jurisdictions also, where the level of infant mortality of non-marital children was frequently higher than the level in marital children, and what may be the reasons for this. The contemporary situation could be enlightening here. Also the kind of medical care available, and nutritional factors.

In the matter of adoptions, we must be aware of what was seen as good practice at the time. Often this involved minimising the bonding of the mother and child. Sending children abroad was not just a practice in Ireland: many children were sent from UK to Australia.

To look at international experience is not a way of justifying all that was done; but if we fail to look at the wider picture, we may be in danger of blaming ourselves because we are Irish, and largely Catholic.

I’m sure there are other relevant matters which do not come to mind at present. All in all, as the statement makes clear, it is important that the Commission take the matter in its historical context. This was a matter of serious failure in the Murphy Report.

The Commission must consider whether it can name and shame people they consider to blame: this was a very serious failure and injustice in a Commission of Investigation, as the Sweeney report makes clear.

It will be instructive to see whether this new Commission of Investigation learns from the errors of the past, and whether they pay attention to the study of the Murphy Report produced by Fergal Sweeney.

Rory Connor July 19th, 2014 at 4:03 pm 
One point that Fergal Sweeney did NOT mention is that the Murphy Report on Dublin includes criticism of Archbishop John Charles McQuaid even though he died in in 1973 and the inquiry was supposed to investigate the actions of the Catholic Church in the period 1975 to 2004. 

Also the Report failed to comment on the widely-publicized allegations of pedophilia against the late Archbishop even though these were made in 1999 i.e. WITHIN the period that Judge Murphy was supposed to report on. Could the fact that the allegations were universally rejected as false, have anything to do with this curious omission? The Dublin Archdiocese under Archbishop Desmond Connell, strongly repudiated the claims. Did they really have no effect on the attitudes of senior clergy who had to deal with similar sex claims against Dublin priests?

Judge Murphy’s report on Cloyne also failed to refer to scurrilous allegations against Bishop John Magee for which the UK Guardian was forced to apologise in 1994 and TV3 in 1999. Did Judge Murphy believe that these false allegations had NO effect on how the Bishop would have viewed similar claims against his priests?

The current investigation into Mother and Baby homes was sparked by a world-wide media storm based on claims that the Bon Secour nuns in Tuam had dumped the bodies of dead children into a septic tank. Most of the journalists who published this obscene libel have now quietly dropped it and only a few have had the grace to apologise. I hope that Judge Murphy will not fail to provide a detailed analysis of this fake atrocity story and name those responsible for creating it.


Dr Margaret Kennedy July 20th, 2014 at 9:34 am
 

It seems to me that the ACP despite its claim not to want to “attempt to obstruct the investigation” is in fact, conveying from day one that Judge Yvonne Murphy needs to brush up on her "practices and procedures" or even is "not suitable"  which from my perspective is disrespectful and does not fill me with admiration. Such enquiries are always limited by resources, information lost, not given (!) and in the end humanity and one’s human fallibility. I suspect some clergy did not equip themselves well in that enquiry! One could unpick most inquiries as ‘deficient’.


It further seems to me that the ACP wants to highlight the ‘unfairness’ of the Murphy Commission i.e. being allegedly ‘unfair’ towards clergy rather than hope that justice will be served to women and children incarcerated in ‘mother and baby homes’ and the subsequent (often) blighted lives of these women and children. That the ACP take this defensive clergy stance continues to present the Catholic Church as an institution largely only of benefit to clergy themselves! When Clergy begin to see the deficiencies of it’s OWN institution rather than point out the log in another’s eye, then will lay people subjected to the horrors of past Catholicism receive justice. I suspect that most of the Murphy Commission painted an accurate picture of victims abuse and the ACP statement above seeks to damn it whole and entire thus almost calling victims ‘liars’. Have we not endured enough of this clericalism? Now could the ACP speak/say something about the Women and Children who suffered in Mother and Baby Homes?

Pádraig McCarthy July 20th, 2014 at 1:19 pm 
Dr Margaret Kennedy 
Lessons need to be learned from the Murphy Commission – precisely because of deficiencies clearly identified by Fergal Sweeney, and also in my book Unheard Story. The ACP and Fergal Sweeney and I have been careful to recognise explicitly the valuable work done by the Commission. We are greatly concerned that justice be done for those who were abused, and for all concerned in the mother and baby homes.

The ACP itself is not a perfect association, and is very much aware of serious failings in the Church. The ACP certainly does not take a defensive stance in this regard.

It is not true to write, as you do, that “the ACP statement above seeks to damn [the Murphy Commission] whole and entire thus almost calling victims ‘liars’.” This cannot be found anywhere in any statement from the ACP; nor is it in Fergal Sweeney’s document; nor is it in my book.

This is not at all incompatible with bringing to attention deficiencies in the Murphy Report. One does not correct one injustice by inflicting another injustice. The points made by Fergal Sweeney in his document are the points to address: this is what is at issue here. The really strange thing is that the media and the political establishment have not so far addressed the matters raised by Fergal Sweeney.

Your work has been valuable in bringing public attention to abuse. It is understandable that any person who has experience of abuse, as you have, would be wary of anything that may seem to downgrade the appalling abuse which is well documented in the Murphy Report. It is vital that we hold on to that, and at the same time not fail to address failures in procedural fairness in the work of the Commission. This is not an attempt to exculpate anyone.

It is because the ACP wants the full story of the mother and baby homes to be made clear that the statement was issued. The media have backed away very much from initial sensational reports. As the ACP statement says: “It is important that it be carried out competently, justly and in strict accordance with guidelines to be laid down by the government, which should reflect natural and constitutional justice.” If there were deficiencies in the Murphy Report, as I believe Fergal Sweeney shows, then, indeed, “Making the same mistakes twice, when people’s characters and reputations are at stake, would be unconscionable.”

Joe O'Leary July 21st, 2014 at 11:50 am
 
What one would like to see in a new Murphy report is a deeper sense of historical perspective, setting the work of the sisters who ran mother and child homes, Magdalene laundries, etc., in the context of the demands of society at the time. Even the shaming and shunning of unmarried mothers alleged to be a uniquely Catholic outlook could be put in perspective — unmarried mothers were not viewed benignly anywhere. As Fintan O’Toole points out, the vast amount of secret abortions that is our current solution to unwanted pregnancies bespeaks similar attitudes which have not gone away even though no longer connected with Catholic notions of guilt and sin. And it would also be nice if the next Murphy report recorded also the positive things people had to say about the sisters. If demonizing indignation is allowed to set the tone of the new report, as it in part set the tone of the Dublin and Cloyne reports, it will only undercut its reliability as work of historical reference.

Pádraig McCarthy July 29th, 2014 at 9:41 am 
Vincent Twomey has a good article in the Irish Times today (29 July) on the Opinion page, expressing similar reservations about how the Commission of Investigation may be influenced by its composition.
What’s Wrong with the Proposed Mother and Babies Home Commission
Opinion: Appointment of judge to chair body raises expectation of criminal findings

Eddie Finnegan July 29th, 2014 at 1:28 pm 
The interesting Opinion piece by Vincent Twomey in this morning’s Irish Times perhaps goes a step further than the ACP Statement and other substantial comments above. He asks, not just “Why Judge Yvonne Murphy?”, but why any judge as chairman of the mother-and-baby home inquiry? Like several of the contributors above, he asks why the narrow concentration “primarily on the mother-and-child homes run by Catholic religious congregations together with one Protestant-run home”. He also wonders whether the commission will enquire into the sensationalist media coverage of the original Tuam story.
What’s Wrong with the Proposed Mother and Babies Home Commission

Perhaps Vincent can hope for a fairer hearing from commenters on this forum than from the often rabid online commentariat the Irish Times now permits or even encourages. If they don’t permit such mindless anonymous or pseudonymous rubbish in their Letters Page, why leave serious contributors open to it online?


Rory Connor August 4th, 2014 at 12:34 am 
Fr. Vincent Twomey’s article in the Irish Times on 29 July raises a couple of very important issues
What’s Wrong with the Proposed Mother and Babies Home Commission
Should the commission uncover grave misdeeds, even criminal actions, natural justice demands each instance be dealt with according to due procedures, all of which are predicated on the presumption of innocence. Malicious accusations against “the nuns” by some public commentators have been deeply offensive, not least to today’s aged Sisters, who, with depleted human resources, continue to provide unsung service to the marginalised in Ireland, which the State cannot provide. ……
Finally, it would be a welcome development if the commission were to devote some attention to the media’s coverage of the initial Tuam story. How did such sensationalist coverage affect the women and children themselves – and those who provided service in the homes? What further hurt did it cause?”
The purveyors of ludicrous atrocity stories about the Bon Secour nuns have now largely gone silent – at least on the allegations that actually can be TESTED. So it may be helpful to remind ourselves of what they originally wrote: 
Bodies of 800 babies, long-dead, found in septic tank at former Irish home for unwed mothers, declared the Washington Post. ‘800 skeletons of babies found inside tank at former Irish home for unwed mothers’, said the New York Daily News. ‘Galway historian finds 800 babies in septic tank grave’, said the Boston Globe. ‘The bodies of 800 babies were found in the septic tank of a former home for unwed mothers in Ireland’, cried Buzzfeed. Commentators angrily demanded answers from the Catholic Church. ‘Tell us the truth about the children dumped in Galway’s mass graves’, said a writer for the Guardian, telling no-doubt outraged readers that ‘the bodies of 796 children… have been found in a disused sewage tank in Tuam, County Galway’. ……. 
The foregoing details are from Brendan O’Neill’s article on the SpikedOnLine website and he also comments that 
A hysterical piece in the Irish Independent compared the Tuam home to the Nazi Holocaust, Rwanda and Srebrenica, saying that in all these settings people were killed ‘because they were scum’ 
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/the-tuam-tank-another-myth-about-evil-ireland/15140#.U9muh9J4xjs

Brendan O’Neill is an atheist. Yet his article is entitled “The Tuam Tank: Another Myth about Evil Ireland” and the subtitle is “The obsession with Ireland’s dark past has officially become unhinged.” Compare this to Fr Brian D’Arcy’s article in the Sunday World on 10 June entitled “Fr Brian: Baby Graves are Our Greatest Crime” that includes the following
http://www.sundayworld.com/top-stories/columnists/fr-brian-d-arcy/fr-brian-baby-graves-are-our-greatest-crime
When I first heard the news that more than 800 babies were buried in what was formerly a septic tank I was astonished – because initially I thought it happened in some famine-stricken country today. Then I thought I was hearing about Nazi Germany…..” etc etc
When the Commission of Investigation eventually issues its Report, will it even mention these fake atrocity stories that shamed us world-wide? Or will the Report ignore every allegation that is OBVIOUSLY false while accepting as true any claim that the nuns cannot PROVE is a lie? I strongly suspect the latter. After all, that is what happened in all previous investigations of this type!


Fr Brian D'Arcy [My comment dated 17 August 2020]


The above-mentioned Sunday World article by Father D'Arcy is no longer online but a shorter version is available  in the Irish Examiner dated 5 June 2014 entitled Disposal of babies' bodies in Tuam 'as bad as Nazi Germany': Fr Brian Darcy 

Well-known cleric Fr Brian Darcy has said the discovery of almost 800 babies bodies next to a Galway mother and baby home is as bad as anything that happened in Nazi Germany.

The Government has today confirmed that a "scoping exercise" is underway to determine whether other mass graves such as that found in Tuam exist in other parts of the country.

Fr Brian Darcy said he thought previous scandals involving the Church had left him "unshockable", but that this was a shocking as something that happened in Germany during World War II.

He added that people needed to be brought to justice for "sinful crimes". "I think if the facts are as bad as they seem to be, and I have no reason to doubt that, I think this will cause a massive revolution about the kind of country that we had and the kind of country that we're all children of."

(Helpful key words after the article include "Nazi Germany" and "World War II")