Court told of support for incest mother by Catholic group

gurramok

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0122/1232474673365.html?via=mr

Phookin repugnant. 4 more years of abuse that this anonymous organisation has indirectly inflicted on those poor kids.:mad:

Religion gone bonkers!

SOCIAL WORKERS believe that a mother who subjected her children to incest and serious neglect received support from “a Catholic right-wing organisation” when she got a High Court injunction in 2000 to stop the children from being placed in the care of relatives.

Roscommon Circuit Court yesterday heard horrific details about the plight of the six children who, despite coming to the notice of social workers in 1996, were not into taken into care until 2004.

One of the children was sexually abused by his mother, while all of the family were forced to live in filthy conditions without adequate food, clothing or heating.

Judge Miriam Reynolds asked why eight years elapsed during which social workers and home helps regularly visited the home before the children were removed from “what seems to have been an awful household”.

Tadgh Guider, a social work team leader, said there was concern about the family but the mother became involved with “a Catholic right-wing organisation” which provided her with financial support in her successful bid to get a High Court injunction. He said after this court case there was a certain amount of caution about how to approach the family.

Mr Guider said efforts would have been made to talk to the children and to neighbours in order to build up the case for getting a care order.

After a brief adjournment granted to allow health officials to get details of the High Court order, the judge was told that a voluntary arrangement had been brokered in September 2000 which would have allowed the children to be placed in the care of relatives. But then, in a “bolt from the blue” in October, the mother had gone to the High Court and got an order restraining the then Western Health Board from placing the children in the care of relatives.

Paddy Gannon, a childcare manager, said he was contacted by a woman called Mina Bean Uí Chroibín around the time of the application and she said that it was support the family needed, not intrusive action by the health board. He had no evidence that she was involved in the court application but he suspected it.

One of the children read a victim impact statement to the court about the terrible effect his mother’s action had on his life. He said he never had a childhood and always felt different to other children. He could never forgive her for what she had done.

The woman has pleaded guilty to two counts of incest committed in June 2004 and on a date unknown between July and October 2004. She has also pleaded guilty to two charges of sexual abuse against this son on the same dates and to neglecting and ill treating each of her six children from 1998 to 2004 .

Biggins

Sick people.

Dragan

Obviously they were fine with it as she was not using contraception.

gurramok

More on this story
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0122/1232474672717.html
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0122/1232474672721.html

THE MOTHER of six children who were forced to live in a filthy home, where mice ran on top of urine-drenched beds and where there was rarely food, is due to be sentenced today. She has pleaded guilty to two counts of incest and two charges of sexual abuse against a son, and also to neglecting and ill-treating each of her children from 1998 to 2004.

Roscommon Circuit Court heard yesterday that the children had head lice so big that they ran down their faces.

The children also had fleas and were taunted at school and on the bus because they smelled as their clothes were never washed.

The children, who are now aged from 10 to 19, are living in three separate foster homes, having been taken into care in 2004.

Their plight came to the attention of the Garda after the oldest child made certain disclosures to social workers in 2004.

He told gardaí that the house was cold, the walls were damp, the range in the kitchen was lit about once a month, that all the rooms were “kips” that there was rubbish strewn everywhere, that bedclothes were never changed even though two of the children wet the bed, and that his mother regularly went out drinking, sometimes until 3am or 4am.

He said that social workers and home helps used to come to the house and that the mother made the children tidy up before these visits. The court heard that the cups were taken out and that food was bought for these visits.

Judge Miriam Reynolds heard that so much rubbish was dumped in a shed at the back of the house that it was falling out the door and that the cats used to leave dead rats at the back door.

Five rats were piled up at the door on one occasion.

A series of photographs were shown to the judge illustrating the filth in the house.

Sgt John Hynes said that it seemed that nothing was ever thrown out, kitchen utensils were never washed, the bathroom was in an appalling state, the toilet was never flushed and dirty water was left in the sink. It was not possible to see the kitchen table because of the dirt. Clothes were never washed and were packed into bags.

One of the woman’s daughters told Sgt Hynes that she was sometimes slapped on the bare bum. Sometimes there was no food for breakfast and no food when they got home from school. The beds were never changed and were smelly.

Her mother used to go to the pub and was drunk when she got home. She said that on the school bus other children said they were smelly and would not let them sit down.

Another child told gardaí they were bullied at school. Nobody wanted to sit beside them because they were smelly. Once another child drew a picture of a monkey and put her name on it.

She could feel head lice crawling down her face and she tried to snatch them off so no one would see them. Her mother told her not to tie up her hair so no one would see the lice.

When she scratched her head she could see head lice and dirt under her nails. There was never heating in the house – just a fire in the sitting room if her mother was there.

The child said she was afraid to go out in the dark to get coal when her mother was out in the pub. Sometimes the bread was green and she could not eat breakfast but some of the younger children would eat it. The milk was often sour. There were maggots in clothes and her mother found two dead mice under the bed.

Her older brothers used to watch naked women on the television when her mother wasn’t there and they would not let the smaller children into the room, the court heard.

Another child said that their mother was sometimes so drunk when she came home that she staggered and they did not understand what she was saying.

Judge Reynolds was told that the defendant’s sister told gardaí that she had always been selfish and did not care about anyone else as long as she got what she wanted.

She said that when the children visited her she would take them shopping and give them money for sweets but they spent it on food like tins of salmon which they would bring home to the rest of the children.

A foster mother who in 2004 looked after five of the children said that all their clothes had to be burnt. One child was wearing shoes which were two sizes too small when he arrived. All were infested with head lice.

The court heard that the mother estimated that she got up to €900 in children’s allowance and most of that was spent on drink. She admitted that her children were left hungry and sometimes they were blue with the cold.

They got a proper dinner on the two days a week that social workers called.

PrivateEye

They're becoming seriously irritated with their lack of influence in Ireland today, a few weeks back I seen Yoof Defence leafleting in town and people openly telling them to 'fcuk off with the dinosaurs' and the like.
Undoubtably the most disturbing news story I've heard in a long time, I don't know if I even like the idea of it being discussed in After Hours. No mother on this earth you'd think.....

Whoever they are, it highlights their extremism in its ugliest form, and slaps a nice big 'mentalist' sticker across them too. Why can they not name the organisation?

Slow Motion

TBH I don't see any humour in the above!

Mingey

Surely the teachers would have noticed that there are ongoing problems in the household?

Fratton Fred

Sounds like social services are trying to blame someone else for their own **** up.

What the **** were the rest of the family playing at as well, did their auntie not think to kick the **** out of her sister.

There's a lot more guilty people here than some catholic nutters and a deranged mother.

Slow Motion

I thought my sense of humour was as sick and twisted as anyone elses, aparently not.

The_Minister

If this is the Catholic group I am thinking of, then even the Church don't get on with them.

It's like the Lisbon Treaty:
Bishops - Nothing to do with abortion, make up your own minds.
Certain Groups - Abortion for all from Lisbon!!!!!!

Raiser

Strange that - can't imagine why the Catholic Church would have supported child sexual abuse........

- Oh wait - I forgot for a moment that they're the Planets top paedophile organisation.

Dragan

Slow Motion wrote: »

I thought my sense of humour was as sick and twisted as anyone elses, aparently not.

Well consider the base level response to anything among my friends is "go and **** your mother in the shower", i cannot be blamed for what i come out with in this thread.

Terry

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Sounds like social services are trying to blame someone else for their own **** up.

What the **** were the rest of the family playing at as well, did their auntie not think to kick the **** out of her sister.

There's a lot more guilty people here than some catholic nutters and a deranged mother.

Indeed.

So the mother had some legal help and the health board backed down.
Does this mean that anyone with a bit of money can get away with abusing kids?

As for the jokes, there's a forum for that sort of crap.
Keep it out of here please.

gurramok

Mods, merge with the house of horrors thread i didn't notice till now, if needs be?

In last few mins, 'Mother found guilty' http://www.herald.ie/national-news/mother-guilty-of-incest-in-house-of-horrors-1609864.html

The woman pleaded guilty to charges of incest, sexual assault, and wilful neglect yesterday at Roscommon Circuit Court.

big b

Desperately, desperately sad story.

These are real kids & imho it's not suitable fodder for "humour"

gurramok

Some more info from the Indo
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mother-from-hell-is-guilty-of-incest-1609693.html

Dord

That's just sickening. I feel sorry for the kids to have to go through that. There's nothing funny about it.

Sharpshooter

Its hard to fathom , that 8 years of these children being visited by Public Health nurses and Social workers , plus Home Help , and no one took them away from her.
Were these people blind?
Poor kids , lots of problems ahead in life I would imagine.

corkhero

Mind boggling how this wasnt noticed sooner.

surely the teachers in school would have known that something was up and that the kids hygeine wasnt up to scratch.

Feel sorry for this kids tho.

hope the mother rots!

kelle

I feel sick after reading about this in the Star. Those poor, poor children - I hope they will be okay.
To think of all the good people who can't have children when this evil monster could have six and subject them to such abuse.

Wagon

kelle wrote: »

I feel sick after reading about this in the Star. Those poor, poor children - I hope they will be okay.

The younger ones maybe, but the older ones? not a chance

Where were the rest of the relitives? And neighbours? And teachers? This could have been stopped years ago.

Red Alert

She's a truly evil individual, I wonder who the organization is?

Slow Motion

Seven fcuking years! A man could be sentenced for life, but 7 is the max for a woman:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

Dudess

gurramok wrote: »

Religion gone bonkers!

That's kinda like saying "religion gone religious"...

Slow Motion wrote: »

TBH I don't see any humour in the above!

Dord wrote: »

That's just sickening. I feel sorry for the kids to have to go through that. There's nothing funny about it.

To be fair, I don't think most people consider the case itself funny, they're just using it as fodder for jokes - not that I have time for that.

As for Dragan's comment, all I see in that is something which seems pretty much true.

I know of a similar case to this - it's difficult for protection services to intervene because of acres of bureaucracy. Just because it took so long to do anything doesn't mean people weren't fighting the whole time for something to be done.
I don't think she's evil either, just lazy, neglectful, selfish, ignorant, uneducated, possibly mentally ill and/or slow. Perhaps she's the result of incest herself and has some chromosomal deficiencies going on.

lostexpectation

heres the name of the org Mina Bean Ui Chroibin
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mother-from-hell-is-guilty-of-incest-1609693.html

lostexpectation

this blog has somone who recognises the name
http://twentymajor.net/2009/01/22/that-roscommon-****/

Ronan|Raven

I am from the area of this family. I know the kids and the parents. I am so sickened and truely saddened by what happened these poor children.

Words cannot truely describe my anger. It was well known about the neglect the kids suffered and how they were not being looked after properly. It was allowed to go on far to long by the services. I was unaware of the High Court ruling back in 2000 but it makes sense now that I hear it how the kids were allowed to stay with the family so long.

To those saying why didnt the aunt do x y or z, she did everything she could do and thankfully in the end they were removed from the parents "care"

The kids thankfully from what I know are doing as well as they can after their past few years and are settling in well to a new and better life.

There is more I could say but I wont as it cannot achieve anything and wont help any further cases and there will be more out of this im sure.

Terry

Dudess wrote: »

That's kinda like saying "religion gone religious"...


To be fair, I don't think most people consider the case itself funny, they're just using it as fodder for jokes - not that I have time for that.

As for Dragan's comment, all I see in that is something which seems pretty much true.

I know of a similar case to this - it's difficult for protection services to intervene because of acres of bureaucracy. Just because it took so long to do anything doesn't mean people weren't fighting the whole time for something to be done.
I don't think she's evil either, just lazy, neglectful, selfish, ignorant, uneducated, possibly mentally ill and/or slow. Perhaps she's the result of incest herself and has some chromosomal deficiencies going on.

I deleted nine posts in this thread.
Eight of them were sick jokes and one identified the location of someone named in the report. I wasn't comfortable with that from a legal standpoint.

I left Dragan's post because, while there was a jokey element to it, I also saw it as a bit of social commentary.

lostexpectation

would the long delayed childrens rights referendum made any difference to any rulings.

Cunny-Funt

gurramok wrote: »

Religion gone bonkers!

Gone bonkers? That would imply there was a time where it was not bonkers in the 1st place.

Mingey

Wagon wrote: »

Where were the rest of the relitives? And neighbours? And teachers? This could have been stopped years ago.

And the people in the pub that she used to frequent? Surely people would have noticed she was drinkning away money that was meant to be spent on looking after the kids?

Roscommon being in the country, means communities are closer (to generalise)

How many people could turn a blind eye to a person with 6 kids in filthy clothes who goes out until all hours at night drinking?

Yes the social services are there to protect children from parents like this, but it is also up to those that are in our communities to help where the state fails.

Shiny

Ronan|Raven wrote: »

I am from the area of this family. I know the kids and the parents. I am so sickened and truely saddened by what happened these poor children.

Words cannot truely describe my anger. It was well known about the neglect the kids suffered and how they were not being looked after properly. It was allowed to go on far to long by the services. I was unaware of the High Court ruling back in 2000 but it makes sense now that I hear it how the kids were allowed to stay with the family so long.

To those saying why didnt the aunt do x y or z, she did everything she could do and thankfully in the end they were removed from the parents "care"

The kids thankfully from what I know are doing as well as they can after their past few years and are settling in well to a new and better life.

There is more I could say but I wont as it cannot achieve anything and wont help any further cases and there will be more out of this im sure.

Do you know the name of that right wing organisation ?

Morlar

This reads to me like a social worker making excuses. Their reason for not proceeding earlier is :

"Tadgh Guider, a social work team leader, said there was concern about the family but the mother became involved with “a Catholic right-wing organisation” which provided her with financial support in her successful bid to get a High Court injunction. He said after this court case there was a certain amount of caution about how to approach the family. "

So in other words because this person suddenly had the financial means (from this mystery X support Group) they were more reluctant to proceed. Perhaps if they had been doing their job the initial case would have succeeded and this would not have gone on for so long.

Catholic bashing aside this reads to me like inept social services making excuses.

Morlar

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Sounds like social services are trying to blame someone else for their own **** up.

What the **** were the rest of the family playing at as well, did their auntie not think to kick the **** out of her sister.

There's a lot more guilty people here than some catholic nutters and a deranged mother.

Just saw this now & couldn't agree more.

Marcus.Aurelius

Disgusting failure of the state services to own up to their incompetence and lacklustre performances. Absolutely pathetic excuses.

Dragan

julep wrote: »

I left Dragan's post because, while there was a jokey element to it, I also saw it as a bit of social commentary.

Pretty much yeah, I mean, it was a mild shot at the fact that they would unknowingly ( i can only assume ) help this woman simply because she portrayed herself to them ( once again, i assume ) as a Catholic and would look no further into things than that.

More a shot at them, than a joke about the story itself.

sassa

What was this organisation thinking by getting involved anyway? And if they were so caring why didnt they try to help the kids instead of preventing them being place somewhere safer. In saying that social services were a disgrace to just back down like that it's nice to know I could treat my kids worse than animals and all i need is enough money for a soliciter for them to back down!

Dudess

Dragan wrote: »

Pretty much yeah, I mean, it was a mild shot at the fact that they would unknowingly ( i can only assume ) help this woman simply because she portrayed herself to them ( once again, i assume ) as a Catholic and would look no further into things than that.

More a shot at them, than a joke about the story itself.

That's exactly how it looked to me - nothing nasty or tasteless about it.

Slow Motion

Dragan wrote: »

Pretty much yeah, I mean, it was a mild shot at the fact that they would unknowingly ( i can only assume ) help this woman simply because she portrayed herself to them ( once again, i assume ) as a Catholic and would look no further into things than that.

More a shot at them, than a joke about the story itself.

Fair enough and I accept your point! The others which where deleted were not so thought provoking and I had more issue with those tbh

Terry

I may have missed something in the article, but does anyone know where the father was when all of this was going on?

Mingey

Dragans joke was at the organisation, not the family. Justified, imo.

Mingey

julep wrote: »

I may have missed something in the article, but does anyone know where the father was when all of this was going on?

I'd take a guess that there is more than one father, and she probably doesnt know half of them.

Reflector

corkhero wrote: »

Mind boggling how this wasnt noticed sooner.

surely the teachers in school would have known that something was up and that the kids hygeine wasnt up to scratch.

Feel sorry for this kids tho.

hope the mother rots!

I'd say this isn't an isolated case, I'm sure social workers see terrible things all the time, the kind of stuff most people just choose to ignore, out of sight etc. I'd say it takes a long time to get a court order but I think that maybe there should be some emergency procedure that can be put into place in extreme circumstances. This kind of thing is bound to repeat itself unless the laws change.

sassa

imo the kids involved should take a case against both the organisation and social services because of the ineptitude of them those kids had to suffer longer than they should have.

Mingey

What exactly did the organisation do? Were they aware of the incest & neglect?

nacho libre

Mingey wrote: »

What exactly did the organisation do? Were they aware of the incest & neglect?

they supported her financially so she could contest a high-court injunction to take her children into care.

seamus

Mingey wrote: »

What exactly did the organisation do? Were they aware of the incest & neglect?

They interfered and seem to have provided her with money. The state don't try to take children from their families without a very good bloody reason, so anyone who even considers blocking it on someone else's behalf, would want to know that person inside-out and be able to justify the reason you're helping them based on more than some fictional book.
Whether they were aware of the neglect is kind of irrelevant - if they're weren't aware, they should have made themselves aware.

cjt156

nacho libre wrote: »

they supported her financially so she could contest a high-court injunction to take her children into care.

I believe yesterday's Times said she won the injunction to stop them being placed with the Aunt who first raised concerns. In fairness I think a lot of people were trying to help but the system moves ridiculously slowly, once the court injunction was in place it set things back years.

Morlar

seamus wrote: »

They interfered and seem to have provided her with money. The state don't try to take children from their families without a very good bloody reason, so anyone who even considers blocking it on someone else's behalf, would want to know that person inside-out and be able to justify the reason you're helping them based on more than some fictional book.
Whether they were aware of the neglect is kind of irrelevant - if they're weren't aware, they should have made themselves aware.

Maybe the state ought to be able to put together a case which can withstand basic paid legal representation ?

What the social services said boils down to -

- ) if the parent(s) have financial capacity to resist a case like this then we tend not to bother.

IF you take it for granted that social services dont have a policy to prioritise targetting less affluent parents who abuse their kids (above more affluent parents who abuse their kids) then I think either our social services need some kind of performance/skills review/overhaul, or, the legislation in this area is insufficient. Blaming some moron charity is a cop out in my view regardless of whether there is a religious aspect to them or if they are just plain secular do-gooders.

seamus

Morlar wrote: »

What the social services said boils down to -

- ) if the parent(s) have financial capacity to resist a case like this then we tend not to bother.

I don't think that's primarily what they meant. Largely, people will win against social services when it comes to taking your kids away. The very fact that you've gone to court shows that you care, and because our constitution protects the institution of the family, almost above all else, any judge will invariably rule in the parents' favour.
I'm sure social services have taken a number of these cases, and lost, and cost the taxpayer a good deal of money.

Morlar

What the social services said boils down to -

- ) if the parent(s) have financial capacity to resist a case like this then we tend not to bother.

seamus wrote: »

I don't think that's primarily what they meant.

That is how I would read this :


"Tadgh Guider, a social work team leader, said there was concern about the family but the mother became .... (recieved) . ...... financial support in her successful bid to get a High Court injunction. He said after this court case there was a certain amount of caution about how to approach the family. "

I would read that as social services expressing a preference to avoid mounting legal cases where the people have sufficient funds to defend themselves.

As I said - either social services need to be reviewed/rebuked/heads roll. Or the legislation in this area may need to be improved. Blaming the idiot charity is a copout. Another pointless opportunity for religion bashing.