Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on he[email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

Sisters of Charity purportedly gift land to the State

1456810

Comments

  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Bannasidhe


    It is not Merrion Square or South County Dublin, for starters. The soon to be yummy mummies would have to travel to TALLAGHT along with the Gods, sorry consultants. Tongue in cheek there BTW.

    Anyway it makes more sense to have a new maternity unit in an area where there is population growth and a lot of house building going on. Blanchardstown would be another bet.

    I am not at all familiar with Dublin's geography or the ease of access of the various possible sites but I do think given it's going to be the National hospital it should be easily accessible to the majority of the population which technically lives outside Dublin.
    By which I mean Dublin has the greater density but not the majority of the population.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,610 ✭✭✭ MrMusician18


    aloyisious wrote: »
    Possibly a result if plan B is the state's response to the sleight of hand trick the order is currently trying on with it's SVHG "independent" board saying it will not sell the site to the state. There's no real point in anyone arguing that the SVHG board are NOT working hand in glove with the owners of the site anymore. The interests of the new NMH and any women who would be patients there have no relevance to the order, period.

    The amount of money spent by whomever is funding the new car park being built at the Elm Park campus will be sorely lost if there are no new customers to use it.
    Whatever made you think they ever really mattered to anyone stirring this?

    This is entirely agenda driven (every participant has their own) and nothing to do with patient care.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,533 ✭✭✭✭ Beechwoodspark


    robindch wrote: »
    And that's the difference with the National Maternity Hospital where religious will necessarily be involved.

    Still can't understand why this is a matter for discussion in the year the Mother and Baby Home report came out. I mean, who in their right minds actually wants religious anywhere near mothers and babies after what the religious did and caused?

    It's beyond obscene.

    I don’t want to shock you but Plenty of Catholics (and non Catholics) entrust themselves and their families to catholic run hospitals ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,993 ✭✭✭✭ aloyisious


    I just got a Facebook memories flashback from 2017, coincidentally the year the deal was struck between the SVHG [Sisters of Charity] and the NMH [State]. It's reading explains why there was an urgency in deciding on a good location and the order's gifting was most probably a gift-horse the Gov't could not refuse.

    The report on June 23, 2017 as being related on RTE Sean O'Rourke radio show of the availability of surgical operating equipment and ancillary equipment at the NMH at Holles St sounds ridiculous for the 2010's. Having to get doctors to run to get ice from the local pubs to keep the patient cool, to get surgical clamps from another hospital and surgical implements from the Blackrock Clinic under Garda escort means the NMH needs not a shake-up but a more fitting funding and location.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭ lazygal


    Plenty of Catholics (and non Catholics) entrust themselves and their families to catholic run hospitals ?

    For decades women in Dublin would trade stories about avoiding Holles St and going to the Rotunda if possible because HS was baby first and the Rotunda had a ward for the girls who got paid on a Friday and had their abortions and then needed a doctor no questions asked.
    I would avoid any hospital with a religous ethos. Unfortunately many people don't have a choice of hospital to attend especially in an emergency. We avoided catholic schools for similar reasons. No way did we want our children subject to catholic control over sex ed and the teaching of RSE.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭ lazygal


    It is not Merrion Square or South County Dublin, for starters. The soon to be yummy mummies would have to travel to TALLAGHT along with the Gods, sorry consultants. Tongue in cheek there BTW.

    Anyway it makes more sense to have a new maternity unit in an area where there is population growth and a lot of house building going on. Blanchardstown would be another bet.

    I live on the North side of Dublin and attended Holles St, as have plenty of women I know. It was a handy city centre location for work and on the DART line for appointments when I wasn't working. Blanch and Tallaght would be a pain to get to from many areas of the North side, there's no direct bus or rail service.
    Mount Carmel was where women who wanted fully private care and all their patients ended up going to the Rotunda when it closed.
    If I had to attend somewhere like Blanch for hospital appointments every week as I did after 20 weeks on my first and other pregnancies I'd have to take a lot more time off work and for some women this will be really difficult. People are used to the Holles St location and Vincent's isn't too far from it when you know Dublin.
    That said no way are the nuns getting a free hospital.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,253 Mod ✭✭✭✭ robindch


    I don’t want to shock you but Plenty of Catholics (and non Catholics) entrust themselves and their families to catholic run hospitals ?
    Indeed - they are sad tributes to the absence of choice in many places, the power of both indoctrination and cognitive dissonance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,993 ✭✭✭✭ aloyisious


    I copied this from my last post, dated 02 May 2021, on the "Nuns get to own new New maternity Hospital" thread and it seems pertinent to this thread. Bringing that post up to today, I think three items in it must be considered where the future of the proposed building of the new NMH at the orders St Vincent's site is concerned.

    1. The Orders 2010 ‘Health Service Philosophy and Ethical Code’ governing what medical procedures cannot be carried out in the order's hospitals.

    2. The constitution of the new NMH proposed for the orders site, who wrote and set out it's parameters, and how far do it's contents align with the orders philosophy above?

    3. Clause 5.11 of that constitution lets the directors power to sell, lease, mortgage, dispose etc etc property of the Co....

    My original post on the other thread follows below....

    Has anyone seen, heard or read an article from TheJournal.ie concerning the new NMH deal and the Nuns. I read an article posted on another site concerning the above but can't find it listed on the journals site. The Journal's report referred to a mortgage of the present public hospital to BOI in 2010 and clause 5.11 of the new NMH constitution giving its directors power to "acquire, hold, sell, manage, lease, mortgage or dispose of all or any part of the property of the company".

    The company referred to is the new NMH company set up in 2016. I am not sure if the 2010 BOI mortgage would give the BOI pre-existing rights over any properties listed within the new NMH property list, which is why I am asking my question from the start.

    One important point is this from the other site's post which IS NOT PART of the reported TheJournal.ie report mentioned on the other site.. The hospitals are governed by the Order’s 2010 ‘Health Service Philosophy and Ethical Code’ and do not provide contraception, sterilisation, IVF, abortion and other procedures, legal in Ireland but prohibited by Catholic teaching.

    Edit. Dr Peter Boylan wrote a letter publicized in the Irish Indo a few days ago covering his views on a statement from SVU on medical procedures carried out in the hospital in line with the laws of the land will be carried out in the new NMH and free of any religious influence The Indo has firewalled its publication.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,963 ✭✭✭ Call me Al


    Yes aloysius,

    Two completely contradictory perspectives.

    I read an article where they (is it the hospital groupor or is it the charity) claim that all legal medical services are carried out, and then I read what you share and I see that no they can't provide these services due to their ethics.

    What is the truth? It shouldn't be this vague or ambiguous. Are they hiding behind layers of legal clauses and semantics, or the infamous mental reservations.

    The order saying they are gifting the site to the State whilst actually gifting it to another charity indicates to me that they are dishonest actors.

    It's fake news Irish style..


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 26,896 ✭✭✭✭ Hotblack Desiato


    A lot of this (all of it) is politics both civil and medical, where the patient doesn't even come last - they're not even considered.

    Lots of vested interests in play here for sure.
    But the idea that the nuns would just fold their tent, walk away, and give up the hospitals to secular control is laughable. Talk of 99 year lease is just them playing a long game

    The hospital could be built on the RTE site, right beside St. Vincent's.

    It's not right beside Vincents and would require an ambulance transfer. That's not co-location.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,896 ✭✭✭✭ Hotblack Desiato


    Call me Al wrote: »
    Miriam Lord's assessment this morning, and honestly I find it hard to argue with any of it.

    Great article

    You really, really could not make this shítshow up :mad:


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,064 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Lots of vested interests in play here for sure.
    But the idea that the nuns would just fold their tent, walk away, and give up the hospitals to secular control is laughable. Talk of 99 year lease is just them playing a long game




    It's not right beside Vincents and would require an ambulance transfer. That's not co-location.

    Who is going to take control in 10 or 30 years or 99 years down the line?


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭ lazygal


    Who is going to take control in 10 or 30 years or 99 years down the line?

    The State.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,896 ✭✭✭✭ Hotblack Desiato


    Who is going to take control in 10 or 30 years or 99 years down the line?

    As things stand, the Vatican.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,064 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    If that is true and you can show that, you should write it up and send it into the Irish Times. It would attract enormous interest.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,477 ✭✭✭ Flinty997


    Is there a reason they can't just cpo the whole lot.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Bannasidhe


    If that is true and you can show that, you should write it up and send it into the Irish Times. It would attract enormous interest.

    MOD

    Given you are already on a sticky wicket due to your posting style in this forum- you should consider before submitting if what you are about to say is contributing to the discussion. If not, as per above example, and the best you can do is pointless sarcasm you may wish to reconsider.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,993 ✭✭✭✭ aloyisious


    Who is going to take control in 10 or 30 years or 99 years down the line?

    Excepting the present owners of the ground [and the NMH itself - if it is built there and owned by the SVHG] who do you think the ownership would credibly revert to when the lease ran out?


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,323 ✭✭✭✭ Peregrinus


    Who is going to take control in 10 or 30 years or 99 years down the line?
    IIRC the proposal is for 99-year lease with a renewal option (i.e. the state has the right to renew) for a further 50 years.

    Assuming the renewal option is exercised, then in 149 years if the parties do not negotiate another renewal the lease expires, and the owner of the land retakes possession.

    However it's unlikely that, by then, the building about to be built now will still be standing and, if it is, it won't be in use as a hospital; it will be obsolete long before that. Or, it will have been replaced, either with a new building on the same site, which will involve the renegotiation of the lease, or with a building on a new site.

    Modern institutional buildings are rated for about 50 years. After that, they require more and more renewal and eventual replacement.

    The building in Holles St that the NMH is leaving for Elm Park is a purpose-built hospital around 90 years old, with major extensions that are around 60 years old. They're leaving because it's not fit for purpose.

    Bottom line: if this lease expires in 149, 0r even 99, years, the landowner obtains vacant possession of the buildings. But their residual value at that time is likely to be low or nil.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,350 Mod ✭✭✭✭ smacl


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Bottom line: if this lease expires in 149, 0r even 99, years, the landowner obtains vacant possession of the buildings. But their residual value at that time is likely to be low or nil.

    I wouldn't be so sure of that. Given this is a facility for which the country has an ongoing need, it will be maintained for as long as economically feasible, rebuilt piecemeal or rebuilt entirely over time. Given the location is currently attractive, it would seem likely as not that this would happen on the same site.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,323 ✭✭✭✭ Peregrinus


    smacl wrote: »
    I wouldn't be so sure of that. Given this is a facility for which the country has an ongoing need, it will be maintained for as long as economically feasible, rebuilt piecemeal or rebuilt entirely over time. Given the location is currently attractive, it would seem likely as not that this would happen on the same site.
    Quite possibly, but that would involve a renegotiation of the lease. No tenant pays for major capital expenditure on a property he has rented unless he is satisfied that the length and other terms of his lease mean that he gets the benefit of his expenditure, rather than it accruing to the landlord. At any time when the lease has less than 50 years to run, the hospital will not be rebuilt on the same site without an extension of the lease having been secured.

    Seriously, the issue here is not to whom the residual value of the hospital building will ultimate accrue. That really is not important; if anything, it's a distraction. What matters is who will control the operation of the hospital while it's operating in the building, not who gets the building after the hospital is finished with it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 398 ✭✭ Garibaldi?


    lazygal wrote: »
    For decades women in Dublin would trade stories about avoiding Holles St and going to the Rotunda if possible because HS was baby first and the Rotunda had a ward for the girls who got paid on a Friday and had their abortions and then needed a doctor no questions asked.
    I would avoid any hospital with a religous ethos. Unfortunately many people don't have a choice of hospital to attend especially in an emergency. We avoided catholic schools for similar reasons. No way did we want our children subject to catholic control over sex ed and the teaching of RSE.

    "the Rotunda had a ward for the girls who got paid on a Friday and had their abortions and then needed a doctor no questions asked" As a person who was born in the Rotunda I'm intrigued by this statement.What does it mean?


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,323 ✭✭✭✭ Peregrinus


    Garibaldi? wrote: »
    "the Rotunda had a ward for the girls who got paid on a Friday and had their abortions and then needed a doctor no questions asked" As a person who was born in the Rotunda I'm intrigued by this statement.What does it mean?
    Back in the day, if you went to the UK for an abortion, returned to Ireland, and then had complications which required investigation or treatment in hospital, you generally went to the Rotunda for that.

    It wasn't a matter of "no questions asked"; doctors always want to take a full history. it was never illegal in Ireland for a woman to have had an abortion in the UK and, even if it had been, hospitals don't generally report patients to the police if the medical history they give discloses unlawful activities. They would not wish to encourage patients suffering from complications of a termination from concealing or denying the fact that they had had a termination; that would compromise the quality of the medical treatment.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,972 ✭✭✭ TheChizler


    What's the significance of getting paid on a Friday?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,963 ✭✭✭ Call me Al


    TheChizler wrote: »
    What's the significance of getting paid on a Friday?

    It'd be a weekend abortion so that they'd be back at work on Monday morning nobody any the wiser.




  • Sir, – We, the consultants of the National Maternity Hospital, are concerned by the potential for misinformation and misunderstanding to delay a vital project to create a world-class maternity hospital for the women and babies of Ireland.

    The misinformation that services at the new maternity hospital will be curtailed by any religious ethos is particularly troubling given its inaccuracy.

    We want to reassure women and their families that all obstetric, neonatal and gynaecological care within Irish law is currently being provided at Holles Street, and will be provided in the new hospital. This will include terminations, tubal ligation, transgender and assisted reproduction services.

    Read full thing here: https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/the-national-maternity-hospital-1.4604869

    Irish Times report on letter:
    A group of 42 senior clinicians at the National Maternity Hospital (NMH) has expressed concern that “misinformation” and “misunderstanding” around the planned relocation of the hospital could delay the move.

    In a letter, published in today’s Irish Times, the consultants say that all procedures will be available should the hospital move from Holles Street to a site on the St Vincent’s campus at Elm Park, including terminations and tubal ligation and transgender and assisted reproduction services.
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/national-maternity-hospital-doctors-fear-misinformation-could-delay-move-1.4605139


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Bannasidhe



    And yet the Transgender community in Ireland is adamant that no hospital in Ireland carries out gender reassignment surgery which is why those wishing to avail of it have to travel. Risking all the post-surgical complications that entails.

    Someone is not telling the whole truth.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,972 ✭✭✭ TheChizler


    Call me Al wrote: »
    It'd be a weekend abortion so that they'd be back at work on Monday morning nobody any the wiser.
    Still don't get it but I may be interpreting too literally.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,963 ✭✭✭ Call me Al


    TheChizler wrote: »
    Still don't get it but I may be interpreting too literally.

    Yes I think you may be.


Advertisement