Tag Archives: Commission of Inquiry into Mother And Baby Homes

From top: Mother and Baby Home; The Mother and Baby Homes Commission of Investigation members at the commission’s launch in 2015, from left: Professor Mary Daly, Judge Yvonne Murphy, Dr William Duncan


This afternoon.

Via RTÉ News:

The State has admitted in the High Court that the rights of nine survivors of mother-and-baby homes were breached when they were not given a draft copy of the report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes before it was published.

The court had heard a challenge by two women, Philomena Lee and Mary Harney, aimed at quashing parts of the final report.

Further submissions were due to be heard in advance of the court giving judgment on their cases. The two cases represented a total of nine similar actions.

Senior Counsel Michael Lynn said the State was consenting to a declaration being made in each case that the State had failed in its duty to provide the parts of the report relevant to each woman in advance of the finalisation of the report.

An acknowledgement by the Minister for Children that each of the women takes issue with parts of the report will be published alongside the report as well as online and in the Oireachtas Library.

Meanwhile…

…Mr Justice Garret Simon Said:

“Each of the applicants had suffered greatly during the time of their residence in the mother-and-baby homes and the court had sympathy for the position they had found themselves in.”

State admits rights of mother-and-baby home survivors were breached (RTE)

RollingNews

Meanwhile…

Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration & Youth, Roderic O’Gorman

This afternoon.

Via Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration & Youth:

‘The Minister acknowledges that, because the relevant parts of the draft report were not furnished to the applicants, they did not have the opportunity to ask the Commission to correct statements within the report that they believed to be wrong. The statement will identify key paragraphs of concern to the applicants in these cases.

‘Finally, in light of the evidence on identity presented by the applicants, the Minister has consented to a declaration that the Commission, by failing to provide the applicant, who is identifiable in the Final Report, with a draft of the report, or relevant part of the report, as required by section 34(1) of the Commission of Investigation Act 2004 prior to submitting the Final Report to the Minister, acted in breach of statutory duty.

‘The Minister hopes that this settlement gives some comfort to the applicants.’

Settlement of applications for judicial review of Final Report of Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes (Gov.ie)

The publication this morning of a report into burial arrangements at Mother and Baby Homes includes a chapter on the transfer of the remains of children and adults who died at the institutions to medical schools for “anatomical study”.

The commission found evidence that children’s remains were studied in Dublin and Galway medical schools but not Cork medical schools.

The report explains that it was legal, under the Anatomy Act 1832, for unclaimed remains to be used in this way, at this time.

But it noted:

“The burials of the anatomical subjects used by the Dublin Medical Schools are properly recorded in Glasnevin Cemetery.

It has not been possible to establish anything about the burials of the child anatomical subjects used in the Galway Medical School as their names are not known.”

Between January 1920 and October 1977, the bodies of more than 950 children who died in the Dublin Union, and associated institutions, including Pellestown, were sent to medical schools in UCD, Trinity College Dublin and the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland.

All but 18 of the 950-plus children were “illegitimate” children and aged between 10 minutes and 15 years at the time of their death, while 27 additional stillborn infants were also sent to the Dublin Medical Schools.

The report found:

“Not all deserted or abandoned children who died in Dublin Union institutions were sent for anatomical studies. There is no information available about the criteria (if any) used to choose which children’s bodies were sent.”

The remains of the children examined in the Dublin schools were later buried in the Poor Ground section of Glasnevin Cemetery.

The commission found:

“They were buried in individual burial plots that were located next to those used for ordinary child and adult burials. The usual practice in Glasnevin Cemetery was for the remains of a number of anatomical subjects to be collectively buried in the same plot on the same day.”

It disturbingly adds:

“It is unknown if the remains of individual bodies used for anatomical studies were placed in separate coffins for burial in Glasnevin. A meeting of the Dublin Board of Guardians in 1907 heard accusations that in the medical schools, coffins were not being used for one body alone, but that the practice was simply to fill up a coffin with various body parts from various individuals who had been dissected.”

The commission’s report states that, under the Dublin Cemeteries Act 1964 and bye-laws under that act, if the remains of more than one person were to be put in a coffin, an application had to be made.

The Glasnevin Trust told the commission: “There are no annotations within the burial registers showing that permission was granted…to allow more than one set of remains per coffin.”

However the commission later notes:

The Glasnevin Trust told the Commission that, while each burial was required to be witnessed by a designated member of staff, the staff did not inspect coffins internally.”

In Galway, the commission found that the Galway Medical School Anatomical Register records that, between 1909 and 1997, the remains of around 690 adults were transferred to the School of Anatomy, Galway Medical School, for anatomical study.

They were transferred from South Dublin Union, Ballinasloe Mental Asylum, Castlebar Mental Hospital, Ennis Mental Hospital and Galway Central Hospital/ Galway Regional Hospital.

The register contains no mention of any children’s remains of having been transferred but the commission states: “evidence exists that children’s bodies were sent to the medical school”.

Of the evidence that shows children’s remains were sent, the commission found:

“In every instance, the body or bodies were supplied by a porter at the Central Hospital/Regional Hospital Galway. In every instance the infant remains were received by the head of the School of Medicine and Anatomy Department, University College Galway.

He paid the porter 10/- for every infant body received. It appears that between April 1949 and November 1964, he received and paid for 35 infant anatomical subjects. None of these infants is recorded in the Galway Anatomical Register.

Unfortunately, no records survive which name the children whose bodies were sold. It is
possible that some of the bodies were stillbirths which, at the time, could not have been registered.”

The report explains that, under the Anatomy Act 1832, a person with “lawful possession” of a dead person could allow for an anatomical examination to take place – unless the person had expressly stated, while alive, that they did not wish this to happen.

This had to be expressed in writing or orally in the presence of at least two witnesses, and bodies could not be sent to schools until at least 48 hours after death.

The report notes:

In the case of deserted or abandoned children who died in these institutions, there was no one with the legal capacity to object to the bodies being sent for anatomical studies.

“The bodies of “illegitimate” children that were unclaimed by the mother or any other relative, could similarly be used for anatomical studies.

“It is not known, but it seems unlikely, that the mothers concerned were made aware of the existence or requirements of the Anatomy Act at any stage during their stay in any of the institutions being investigated.”

Under the act, the medical schools were legally obliged to ensure that the remains of people used in these studies were “decently interred in consecrated ground” and that a certificate of interment be given to the inspector of the district within six weeks of receiving the remains.

The schools were also legally obliged to maintain registers of bodies received.

However, the commission found that the 48-hour rule and six-week limit “were not implemented in practice”.

It found:

“The Commission has since established that a number of children were transferred for anatomical studies from Dublin Union institutions before the 48 hour period for claiming the body was over. In general, burial took place two to three years after the death.”

The commission also recalls a letter written by the Chief Medical Office of Galway County [not named] to the Department of Health in January 1961, complaining about the size and cost of burial spaces for the remains of those whose bodies were studied.

The office wrote:

“A problem has arisen regarding the interment of such remains of bodies following their use for anatomical dissection.

“According to the Rules applicable to burial grounds for every person over 12 years of
age a burial space of 9ft. x 4 ft. must be provided.

“This would mean that if the remnants of ten cadavers were to be interred, ten graves should be provided, ten graves which would prove very costly and indeed wasteful of graveyard space.

“The remains of a cadaver after dissection consists of dismembered bones, perhaps some
entrails and muscles which could be easily accommodated in a coffin 3’ x 12” x 9”, and if placed vertically in the grave four such coffins could be accommodated in the space above prescribed.

“Markers, of course, would be placed over each coffin.

“There would be no intermixing of corpses. I understand that this procedure is adopted for other anatomical schools. I request a direction if the procedure suggested above would be allowed and approved of by your Department.”

The suggestion was rejected, the commission found.

But, it noted:

“…a civil servant’s note on the file states that ‘… it might be said that these rules are not always (or even usually) strictly observed throughout the country’.”

The report can be read in full here

Earlier: Bessborough: ‘There Are 900 Bodies After Going Missing’

Death In Tuam

Screen Shot 2015-12-22 at 13.47.22

Paul Redmond of the Coalition of Mother and Baby Home Survivors

Yesterday representatives of the Coalition of Mother and Baby Home Survivors delivered a letter to the offices of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes – addressed to chair of the investigation, Judge Yvonne Murphy – calling for the commission’s terms of reference to be widened.

Last night, on RTÉ’s Nine News, Paul Redmond, from the group, said:

Only about one third of the entire total of people who were separated as single mothers and children are being included in this inquiry. We need everyone included. And we need everyone to be immediately offered an acknowledgement, an apology and redress while there is still time for an ageing survivor community [of about 50,000] that is quite literally dying by the thousands every year.”

A third?

Further to this, Paul explained to Broadsheet:

“It’s the fact that the people who are excluded were born outside of mother and baby homes which means they were born in places like Holles Street, Rotunda – an awful lot of them – or they might have been born at home. And they were then were all scooped up from there and put into a couple of holding centres or mother and baby homes around the country. But because they weren’t born in mother and baby homes, they were excluded.”

“The only people who are included in this inquiry are people who were born in mother and baby homes. Anybody who was born outside of a mother and baby home was excluded.”

“In the bad old days when the mother and baby homes were around, there was also an awful lot of people, in the very early days, who were born in county homes and they’ve been kind of vaguely looked at but as time progressed, an awful lot of people were born in maternity hospitals from, say, the Fifties onwards and they’re all completely excluded.”

“This is not a repeated [request] as such in that we asked, when we were kind of lobbying and meeting ministers to discuss the terms of reference for the inquiry, we actually wanted them to be about the issue of the separation of the single mothers and children since the foundation of the State but the problem was, as we discovered later, was that [Taoiseach] Enda Kenny, when he gave us a promise of an inquiry – this goes back to last June – after the Tuam story broke in June 2014, he promised an inquiry into mother and baby homes and basically the Government, when the realised how big this entire thing was, they literally had a conniption and decided, well, we promise a mother and baby home inquiry, that’s all we’re giving and nothing else. And no matter how hard we lobbied or what sort of case we put forward, it was always looking likely that they were going to restrict it down as much as possible and that’s exactly what they did.

Watch Nine News back in full here

Call to widen probe into mother and baby homes (RTE)

Previously: A Waste Of Copy And Paste

Meanwhile In Tuam

Nothing To See Here

Magdalene-Laundries-007

Further to the exclusion of the magdalene laundries from the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes.

Justice for Magdalenes writes:

“As JFMR has previously pointed out to Minister Reilly, the McAleese inquiry did not investigate or make findings about abuse or lines of responsibility for abuse in the Magdalene Laundries. Furthermore, the McAleese Report does not contain a single word from the 796 pages of testimony submitted by JFM and it failed to adequately examine issues relating to deaths and burials. Serious doubt has been cast on the accuracy of the McAleese Report’s assertions regarding duration of stay.

The McAleese Committee’s terms of reference were limited to investigating State involvement with the Laundries only. We believe that it is partly because of the gaps in the McAleese Committee’s terms of reference that all religious orders involved still refuse to apologise or provide redress to the women who spent time in Magdalene Laundries.

The Magdalene Laundries abuse must be investigated. The women who are still alive, their families and the families of those who have died, have a right to the truth.

JFMR does note that the Commission of Inquiry ‘can exercise discretion in relation to the scope and intensity of the investigation’. JFMR will avail of the opportunities presented to engage with the Inquiry to present relevant evidence it has gathered through archival research and gathering of oral histories, evidence ignored by the McAleese inquiry.”

JFM Research deeply disappointed at exclusion of Magdalene Laundries from Inquiry (January 9, 2015)

Previously: The Magdalene Report: A Conclusion

The Mother And Child Tribunal