The Adoption Scandal

Shurimgreat · 31-05-2018 11:31AM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

did Leo mention the dark days of 2018 when 4000 children were homeless?

Anyway back to the latest scandal

Or the cervical cancer scandal where his government and the HSE are fighting victims tooth and nail in the courts to prevent settlements? Women who just want to enjoy their remaining time with their children in peace.

I guess all of these contemporary scandals will be bumped down the news agenda while scandals from 50 and 60 years ago are discussed.

tretorn · 31-05-2018 11:37AM

I dont know why we are all so indignant about money being handed over for adopted babies.

There are no babies available for adoption in Ireland because the unwanted ones are aborted in the UK or aborted by women buying pills on line.

Any babies adopted are from overseas and you cant adopt overseas unless you are very wealthy. People are paying thousands of euros or whatever currency is used for babies and whose pocket is this money ending up in.

People using surrogacy are also paying a lot of money for women from impoverished countries to carry babies for them, most of this money is probably going to go betweens who source the women with the wombs for sale. These women are doing this because their lives are wretched so no choice there.

nelly17 · 31-05-2018 11:45AM

As someone said Adoption was Child Trafficking and maby yes under different circumstances most probably would have been aborted if not for our constitution - but its kind of a moot point now because it did happen and happen to 150k Plus people. So that 150k plus people who have a descriminatory wall put up in front of them that is not put up against the rest of the population which prevents them from knowing their actual identity.

Then we have this issue and you have to ask the question why was it done. Was it done for an 'additional Charitable donation'?, was it offered as a wink wink nudge nudge service? Did those people responsable simply not give a toss what went on the documentation which raises the question of just how much Saint Patricks Guild information can be trusted?

It was a meat market with Kids openly advertised in the papers

Shurimgreat · 31-05-2018 11:51AM

nelly17 wrote: »

As someone said Adoption was Child Trafficking and maby yes under different circumstances most probably would have been aborted if not for our constitution - but its kind of a moot point now because it did happen and happen to 150k Plus people. So that 150k plus people who have a descriminatory wall put up in front of them that is not put up against the rest of the population which prevents them from knowing their actual identity.

Then we have this issue and you have to ask the question why was it done. Was it done for an 'additional Charitable donation'?, was it offered as a wink wink nudge nudge service? Did those people responsable simply not give a toss what went on the documentation which raises the question of just how much Saint Patricks Guild information can be trusted?

It was a meat market with Kids openly advertised in the papers

Many ended up in wealthy homes and lived prosperous healthy happy lives.

While the way they were adopted may not have ideal, the ends justified the means. You had to advertise babies for adoption somehow.

The state of the time and families of these mothers/children couldn't give a flying f*ck about these babies. They were treated like crap. That is where the real scandal is.

A life in an industrial school or a life with a wealthy American family. No prizes for guessing which option most would take.

The state cannot wash its hands of this or the Fine Gael or Fianna Fail parties who were in power at the time.

odyssey06 · 31-05-2018 11:55AM

nelly17 wrote: »

So that 150k plus people who have a descriminatory wall put up in front of them that is not put up against the rest of the population which prevents them from knowing their actual identity.

There is no discriminatory wall because there is no 'us' or 'them'. The implication of this is that nobody knows their actual identity with 100% certainty unless they have done a DNA test.

You could be part of the 150,000 or you could be part of the population for which DNA testing would reveal they were fathered someone else or you could be in the part of the population for whom the story your parents told you is true.

The question is whether the government should pro-actively telling people the identity they had have for decades is not their actual identity. I'm saying no they should not.

If it's so important that everyone be told their actual identity, then for 100% certainty we must bring in mandatory DNA testing.

Graces7 · 31-05-2018 12:17PM

Auguste Comte wrote: »

Child trafficking I think would be the proper description of what was going on at the time. How many babies were sold to rich Americans for profit by the nuns during this time? Calling it adoption of any form legal or not is only sanitising the issue, call it what it is.

Catherine Corless is working on this. Should come out when the big Commission report comes out early next year.

Just before the abuse scandals hit. I was working on a book commission and visiting eg homes etc.
I spent a delightful afternoon at Sean Ross Abbey with the few remaining Sisters . So hospitable and kind they were.. even offered me a bed for the night.

They were still involved with the school there for mentally handicapped children an di asked why there seemed to be so much in Ireland,.
They explained that when folk came back home after being adopted to eg the US, they did not know who their real parents were and married their sisters, hence the high incidence of mental handicap.

I did not learn until the scandals broke years later they that they were a major factor in sending babies away.

nelly17 · 31-05-2018 12:25PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

There is no discriminatory wall because there is no 'us' or 'them'. The implication of this is that nobody knows their actual identity with 100% certainty unless they have done a DNA test.

You could be part of the 150,000 or you could be part of the population for which DNA testing would reveal they were fathered someone else or you could be in the part of the population for whom the story your parents told you is true.

The question is whether the government should pro-actively telling people the identity they had have for decades is not their actual identity. I'm saying no they should not.

If it's so important that everyone be told their actual identity, then for 100% certainty we must bring in mandatory DNA testing.

or you could simply look at your Birth Cert? Without having to make appointments and get unidentifying information - head up to to the GRSO and start searching - then narrow down that information and request a copy of what might be your birth cert. That's pretty descriminatory.

CrabRevolution · 31-05-2018 12:27PM

I don't see how it can "help someone's identity" in most cases.

Say you're 70 and got a letter saying your (now dead) parents adopted you from set of biological parents who are also dead.

There's almost no chance you'll suddenly feel a sense of closure and identity and belonging with the biological parents who you never knew and have since died. On the other hand there's a massive chance it will have you questioning your identity, belonging and trust with your parents who you spent your life with.

As has been said above, set up an easily accessible service where people can make enquiries on their status if they reckon they are ready and want the answers. Don't just force the information where it has a good chance of doing harm.

ohnonotgmail · 31-05-2018 12:48PM

nelly17 wrote: »

or you could simply look at your Birth Cert? Without having to make appointments and get unidentifying information - head up to to the GRSO and start searching - then narrow down that information and request a copy of what might be your birth cert. That's pretty descriminatory.

The allegation is that St Patricks Guild falsified birth certs to show the adoptive parents as the birth parents. A birth cert wont do you much good in that case.

_Brian · 31-05-2018 12:48PM

CrabRevolution wrote: »

I don't see how it can "help someone's identity" in most cases.

Say you're 70 and got a letter saying your (now dead) parents adopted you from set of biological parents who are also dead.

There's almost no chance you'll suddenly feel a sense of closure and identity and belonging with the biological parents who you never knew and have since died. On the other hand there's a massive chance it will have you questioning your identity, belonging and trust with your parents who you spent your life with.

As has been said above, set up an easily accessible service where people can make enquiries on their status if they reckon they are ready and want the answers. Don't just force the information where it has a good chance of doing harm.

I think this is the only reasonable option.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 31-05-2018 01:08PM

Graces7 wrote:

I spent a delightful afternoon at Sean Ross Abbey with the few remaining Sisters . So hospitable and kind they were.. even offered me a bed for the night.

You were lucky you weren’t pregnant, because they don’t have the greatest reputation for treating childbearing women with respect never mind kindness or hospitality.

Just curious, was this before or after they burned all the records of the kids they sold?

Shurimgreat · 31-05-2018 02:07PM

Jacoby Wrong Violin wrote: »

You were lucky you weren’t pregnant, because they don’t have the greatest reputation for treating childbearing women with respect never mind kindness or hospitality.

Just curious, was this before or after they burned all the records of the kids they sold?

They likely treated them far better than how the families of these babies treated them. The families didn't want anything to do with them and were unwilling to feed, house or raise them.

_Brian · 31-05-2018 02:33PM

I think we need to remember that Ireland, Europe and indeed the whole world was a very different place and operated under quite a different set of rules and moral values.

We should restrain from applying current values to decisions from that period.

Rather than revenge we should be thinking about what best serves the interests of those affected. I’ve not seen a single argument here that convinced me that these people will be better off by having their identity shattered when tuere is no option for a resolution.

I’ve head calls for redress schemes to be put in place. Surely systems to ensure wellbeing are important. Since when has the solution to everything become hand out wads of cash.

Putting a system in place where concerned people can make discrete contact and explore their past is preferable. Forcing this information on people on their 70’s is barbaric.

Auguste Comte · 31-05-2018 02:48PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

They likely treated them far better than how the families of these babies treated them. The families didn't want anything to do with them and were unwilling to feed, house or raise them.

Have you anything to back that up?

valoren · 31-05-2018 03:02PM

Some of the ad's used at the time are saddening to read.

"Will childless couple adopt Finbarr? Aged 2 years, 2 months, healthy little boy, very intelligent, happy disposition, full surrender, no fee, home must be fully recommended, priests reference essential"

Graces7 · 31-05-2018 03:06PM

Welll no; you are wrong
You are seeing it as if it happened now>

Not so long ago a pregnant girl would be incarcerated and her baby taken away from her when born.

At least when adopted they lived.

orng

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Many of these babies were abandoned babies as a result of crises pregnancies. Had they been conceived in more recent years, there is a very high likelihood the majority would have been aborted and there would be no discussion about anything related to adoption.

Adoption is often a messy, controversial area. No-one ends up happy. Which is probably why many choose abortion rather than having the baby and putting them up for adoption. Abortion is far far easier than a 9 months pregnancy and then adoption.

Our handling of adoption has always been p*ss poor in this country since the foundation of the state. On the otherhand many of these babies were adopted by wealthy Americans and probably lived long and prosperous lives. Being adopted in 1930s, 40s or 50s Ireland by a wealthy American was surely like a golden ticket and a route out of the impoverished backward Ireland of the time. The alternative was either staying in backwards Ireland or if in more recent years being aborted.

No-one in Ireland gave a damn about these babies, particularly not the government or state of the time. They were abandoned, they were dispensable and as I said if it was more recent times they would have been aborted.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 31-05-2018 03:08PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

They likely treated them far better than how the families of these babies treated them. The families didn't want anything to do with them and were unwilling to feed, house or raise them.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/baby-homes-death-rate-up-to-50-271048.html

I doubt that, since the mortality rate was as high as 50% in these “homes”. Whatever they didn’t send to America they starved.

Shurimgreat · 31-05-2018 03:22PM

Auguste Comte wrote: »

Have you anything to back that up?

Laughable response.

Are you alleging these babies were stolen from non "crisis pregnancy" mothers in hospitals?

They likely weren't. They were taken via a nod and a wink from mothers in abandoned baby homes. The nod and a wink was between the mother's family and the nuns.

It was a harsh but classic Irish solution to an Irish problem. The families weren't going to raise the child. The mother didn't have the financial means to raise them. The family would be "disgraced". Similar reasons to why girls had abortions in the UK in more recent times.

And as I said earlier, a life of poverty or industrial school in Ireland or a life with a prosperous family in the United States seems to have been the choice in most cases. So most of these babies hit the jackpot when adopted.

Shurimgreat · 31-05-2018 03:25PM

Jacoby Wrong Violin wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/baby-homes-death-rate-up-to-50-271048.html

I doubt that, since the mortality rate was as high as 50% in these “homes”. Whatever they didn’t send to America they starved.

Yes. Adoption was like winning the lottery. It saved most of the babies who were adopted.

The rest I agreed suffered. But then again they were abandoned. They were dispensable. Once they entered the homes, their families made sure to forget about them and likely talk of them was forbidden.

Its a pity the families of these babies also didn't see fit to follow up, bring them food and so on. But out of sight out of mind I guess.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 31-05-2018 03:30PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Laughable response.

Are you alleging these babies were stolen from non "crisis pregnancy" mothers in hospitals?

They likely weren't. They were taken via a nod and a wink from mothers in abandoned baby homes. The nod and a wink was between the mother's family and the nuns.

It was a harsh but classic Irish solution to an Irish problem. The families weren't going to raise the child. The mother didn't have the financial means to raise them. The family would be "disgraced". Similar reasons to why girls had abortions in the UK in more recent times.

And as I said earlier, a life of poverty or industrial school in Ireland or a life with a prosperous family in the United States seems to have been the choice in most cases. So most of these babies hit the jackpot when adopted.

If the church didn’t rule this country with such an iron fist there’d be a lot less focus on the word crisis in unplanned pregnancy.
Those children were not property, and the nuns or the church had no right to keep the women as tainted whores not fit to be released to society, while they profited from the sale of their children, destroying the records that would ever allow them to be reunited

Shurimgreat · 31-05-2018 03:36PM

Jacoby Wrong Violin wrote: »

If the church didn’t rule this country with such an iron fist there’d be a lot less focus on the word crisis in unplanned pregnancy.
Those children were not property, and the nuns or the church had no right to keep the women as tainted whores not fit to be released to society, while they profited from the sale of their children, destroying the records that would ever allow them to be reunited

What you have to understand about the era is that the church, state and families all worked hand in hand and collaborated to isolate these women in the homes.
It couldn't have worked without all working together.

If the babies were "released" where would they go? Live rough and begging on the streets?
There wan't exactly a queue of people in Ireland of the time looking to take in these babies. The country was impoverished, it was largely subsistence agriculture or emigration.

I think you have to agree, being adopted by an American family was a good way out for all concerned. There was pretty much no credible alternative although if someone can suggest one I'm all ears.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 31-05-2018 03:46PM

I absolutely do not agree that being adopted by an American family was a great thing to happen. How dare the church sell human babies like they’re lumps of meat. Shipping them off away from their mothers who were actual slaves, and some raped repeatedly in those homes, while the Catholic Church built coin.

Those kids in America are now trying to find their mothers (a lot of whom are still alive), and their siblings, knowing nothing of their country or their families because coffin dodging bitter nasty sadistic barren old fûcks refuse to let them access their files. This isn’t an impoverished country anymore. Why do people in their 50s have no access to their birth certs? Why aren’t they assisted in being reunited with their biological families? Look at Philomena Lee and tell me that that was the best thing for her and her child

Shurimgreat · 31-05-2018 03:52PM

Anyone who looks at 1930s-1960s issues through modern eyes are foolish.

Completely different time.

No condoms.
No abortion.
Marital rape allowed.
Woman not allowed to decline sex from husband even if she had numerous children already.
Zero sex education in schools so girls were pregnant before they knew what happened.
Single mothers viewed at the time as fallen women with very few potential husband willing to marry them - not my perception, the common perception of the time.
Unmarried single mothers viewed as a disgrace to the family.
Near universal Catholic Church membership and attendance at mass
An extremely religions and "pious" and "devout" country

This is just some of the context behind abandoned and unwanted babies.

Modern snowflakes I doubt will understand any of this. But yes there was a time before political correctness and snowflakery. Some believe these babies could just be freed to live happy lives in Ireland. Given what I outlined I'd be interested to hear where they thought they'd go.

So again anyone who thinks it could have been different is simply delusional and anyone who looks at that era through modern eyes is wasting their time.

mrslancaster · 31-05-2018 04:02PM

Jacoby Wrong Violin wrote: »

Why do people in their 50s have no access to their birth certs? Why aren’t they assisted in being reunited with their biological families?

If some of the posts on this thread are anything to go by, there are many who think that adopted people in their 50's or older should not have the same rights as the rest of us eg they cannot go to the GRO and request a copy of their birth cert or get a copy of their original baptism cert.

Some posters seem to think that folks over 50 already have one foot in the grave and could not bear the upset of knowing the truth about their history - laughable really and also very ageist.

Did anyone think for one minute that women affected by the cervical smear scandal should not be told their own information? Is that not one of the main reasons the whole issue has been highlighted - personal information being withheld by medical staff. Maybe they also thought it was better that those women were not upset by the facts but they were wrong.

What is the difference? It is someone's personal information and they should be told the facts.

odyssey06 · 31-05-2018 04:02PM

Jacoby Wrong Violin wrote: »

I absolutely do not agree that being adopted by an American family was a great thing to happen. How dare the church sell human babies like they’re lumps of meat. Shipping them off away from their mothers who were actual slaves, and some raped repeatedly in those homes, while the Catholic Church built coin.

If they'd stayed here that's what would have happened to them.
Ended up in an Industrial school or the next generation to populate the Magdalene Laundries.

They were better off in America, given the circumstances in Ireland - that's not to disagree with your point that conditions in Ireland were hellish.

odyssey06 · 31-05-2018 04:17PM

mrslancaster wrote: »

Some posters seem to think that folks over 50 already have one foot in the grave and could not bear the upset of knowing the truth about their history - laughable really and also very ageist.

Did anyone think for one minute that women affected by the cervical smear scandal should not be told their own information? Is that not one of the main reasons the whole issue has been highlighted - personal information being withheld by medical staff. Maybe they also thought it was better that those women were not upset by the facts but they were wrong.

What is the difference? It is someone's personal information and they should be told the facts.

The main reason for the anger wasn't about not upsetting the women - the anger was because medically crucial time was lost.
And then to compound it, when the women sought answers the state fought them in the courts. The two situations are radically different.

It is perfectly reasonable to suggest that the the reaction of a 50 something to a child or a 20 something to receiving this kind of news is different. Adopted people on this thread have even said that.

It is not ageist to suggest that people at different stages of their lives will react differently to a major life event.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that some people will find this news to be very upsetting, useless and traumatic. No doubt whatsoever.

Multiple people on this thread have proposed the setting up of a system whereby people can find out this information, without having it foisted on them and avoiding inflicting unnecessary trauma. There is no denial of rights.

Electric Sheep · 31-05-2018 04:40PM

Jacoby Wrong Violin wrote: »

I absolutely do not agree that being adopted by an American family was a great thing to happen. How dare the church sell human babies like they’re lumps of meat. Shipping them off away from their mothers who were actual slaves, and some raped repeatedly in those homes, while the Catholic Church built coin.

Those kids in America are now trying to find their mothers (a lot of whom are still alive), and their siblings, knowing nothing of their country or their families because coffin dodging bitter nasty sadistic barren old fûcks refuse to let them access their files. This isn’t an impoverished country anymore. Why do people in their 50s have no access to their birth certs? Why aren’t they assisted in being reunited with their biological families? Look at Philomena Lee and tell me that that was the best thing for her and her child

How do you feel about Irish people who adopt children from Russia and other foreign countries?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 31-05-2018 04:47PM

Electric Sheep wrote: »

How do you feel about Irish people who adopt children from Russia and other foreign countries?

Has the child been stolen from the parents?
Has there been money exchanged for the child?
Is the child’s mother being held captive?

Electric Sheep · 31-05-2018 04:52PM

Jacoby Wrong Violin wrote: »

Has the child been stolen from the parents?
Has there been money exchanged for the child?
Is the child’s mother being held captive?

Presumably the child was put up for adoption because of financial or personal duress, just as in Ireland.

Money certainly does change hands in foreign adoptions, only the most naïve would believe otherwise.

I doubt the child's mother is being held captive, at least in the physical sense.

So, what do you think of Irish people who adopt from abroad?

eviltwin · 31-05-2018 04:52PM

Jacoby Wrong Violin wrote: »

If the church didn’t rule this country with such an iron fist there’d be a lot less focus on the word crisis in unplanned pregnancy.
Those children were not property, and the nuns or the church had no right to keep the women as tainted whores not fit to be released to society, while they profited from the sale of their children, destroying the records that would ever allow them to be reunited

Jacoby Wrong Violin wrote: »

Has the child been stolen from the parents?
Has there been money exchanged for the child?
Is the child’s mother being held captive?

It would be naive to think women in countries where foreign adoption is an industry aren't being exploited.

The Adoption Scandal

Comments