Mother and babies homes information sealed for 30 years

When the Mother and Baby Homes Commission of Investigation report was published earlier this year, many people were surprised by its limited findings.

The commission found “little” evidence of physical abuse, “no evidence” of gross abuse, “no evidence” that women were involuntarily detained, “no evidence” of forced adoption and so on.

At the same time, in the separate report compiled by the commission’s confidential committee, we found pages and pages of detailed personal testimony describing those very abuses. It was difficult to account for these contradictions and the report did not explain them.

Now, months later, we have more clarity.

What the commission could have done

It could have hired and consulted with Irish and international experts to fill gaps in its own expertise.

It could have used its interim reports to draw Oireachtas attention to its difficulties in producing a body of usable oral evidence.

It could have engaged openly with the Clann Project, which repeatedly drew attention to flaws in the commission’s methods.

Instead, it is clear from ProfDaly’s statements that the commission disregarded key evidence, and left half of its budget unspent rather than incorporate key oral evidence into its investigative processes.

Flawed process deprives survivors of their stories and compounds injustice to them.

It is now entirely clear that the report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes cannot be allowed to stand. In the past week, deep doubts about the methodology and assumptions of the commission have turned into one abiding certainty: this report fundamentally misrepresents the experiences of the 550 survivors who gave evidence to the confidential arm of the commission.

The Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) wrote repeatedly to the Mother and Baby Home Commission raising concerns about the handling of sensitive survivor testimony and delays in responding to queries.

The DPC said it was “disappointed” that the commission had not quickly responded to one of its letters and warned that failure to respond to its concerns could be a breach of their duty of co-operation under data regulations.

In response, the Mother and Baby Home Commission said it had been given insufficient time to deal with the queries and said issues were being “conflated” in the letters.

The DPC said answers to its concerns should have been “immediately to hand” and that the tight deadlines were necessary given the commission was going to be wound down at the end of February.

A letter said: “This of itself, unfortunately, raises issues about the commission’s compliance with its GDPR obligations.”

n another letter to Children's Minister Roderic O’Gorman, Data Protection Commissioner Helen Dixon reiterated those concerns, saying it was “urgent in light of the commission’s forthcoming dissolution”.

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

The report mentions awful cases of rape and incent, but alike a lot of the testimonies contents, it mentioned it happening before admittance causing the pregnancies. I dont think the sisters would allow 'conjugal' visits