Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Mother and babies homes information sealed for 30 years

12467…56

Comments

  • #152
    Feets
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 281 ✭✭Feets


    I thought it was the the 2004 act which prohibits destroying information.
    Ask yourselves who was going to destroy the information?
    I agree to a certain extent for privacy for those who want it but they did give a testimony ....
    where is the government leaker when you need one...


  • #153
    VillageIdiot71
    Registered Users Posts: 578 ✭✭✭VillageIdiot71


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Pretty much.

    If anything O'Gorman is doing the brave thing by copying the data. The far, far easier thing is to hide behind the 2004 Act and say it must be locked up.
    Absolutely. The criticism being made of the Minister is clearly fueled by homophobia.


  • #154
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,350 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    seamus wrote: »
    There has to be a balance though. People have a right to privacy.

    Same reason why census records are sealed for a century. They *could* just be destroyed. But there is an historical utility to them. So they are kept sealed for an appropriate period of time that individual privacy is not compromised.

    My understanding is that the Minister actually made the best compromise in this. Certain important data is being made immediately available to Tusla. The archive is being sealed and placed into the National Archives. But it's also being made available to the Minister so that he can work on facilitating access to the data for individuals contained in it.

    This will allow the Commission to be wound up (rather than dragging out for another 16 years), still honour the original commitment to seal the documents for 30 years, and provide a way forward to eventually allow victims to get special access to the documents without having to wait 30 years.

    Exactly, and the reason why we are not hearing from those who want their records kept sealed is that they are afraid of their families, friends, neighbours and gossips finding out about their past, and stepping forward to support what the Government is doing exposes that.


  • #155
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    hotmail.com wrote: »
    Why couldn't they seal them for 2 years , why is it 30?
    The purpose of sealing the records is to preserve the privacy of those who talked to the commission.
    The guarantee was put in place in order to make it easier to gather the data. Many people wouldn't have come forward if their anonymity wasn't going to be protected.

    So in that regard, 2 years might as well be none.


  • #156
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,084 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    [quote="Feets;115029337"
    I agree to a certain extent for privacy for those who want it but they did give a testimony ....
    .[/quote]

    They gave testimony after being promised privacy.

    Now the nosey public wants to violate them all over again by removing that privacy.

    Yes, some victims groups have said they now want to waive the privacy. But they don't represent all of the people who testified.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    VillageIdiot71 wrote: »
    Absolutely. The criticism being made of the Minister is clearly fueled by homophobia.

    I think that's overstating it somewhat. He is a poor communicator who never got what he was trying to achieve out properly.


  • #158
    FledNanders
    Registered Users Posts: 393 ✭✭FledNanders


    I think a lot of the outrage that's happening over this on social media is coming from people who simply don't understand the legal intricacies of the privacy issues involved. A lot of it is just calling to 'name and shame' any perpetrators identified to seek some sort of retribution.
    But this is against the 2004 legislation, as contributors to the Commission were guaranteed privacy.

    It's a complex area and trying to convey all those complexities to the public through 10 minute radio interviews etc is near impossible.

    As far as I can tell Maeve O'Rourke's (excellent) piece in the The Journal is simply calling for victims to be able to access their own data should they wish to, not a blanket revealing of all names involved to be splashed across newspapers etc, and this message is getting lost.


  • #159
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    FledNanders wrote: »
    I think a lot of the outrage that's happening over this on social media is coming from people who simply don't understand the legal intricacies of the privacy issues involved. A lot of it is just calling to 'name and shame' any perpetrators identified to seek some sort of retribution.
    But this is against the 2004 legislation, as contributors to the Commission were guaranteed privacy.

    It's a complex area and trying to convey all those complexities to the public through 10 minute radio interviews etc is near impossible.

    As far as I can tell Maeve O'Rourke's (excellent) piece in the The Journal is simply calling for victims to be able to access their own data should they wish to, not a blanket revealing of all names involved to be splashed across newspapers etc, and this message is getting lost.

    In theory, Tusla should be able to facilitate what O'Rourke is looking for, problem is no one trusts Tusla to do it.


  • #160
    VillageIdiot71
    Registered Users Posts: 578 ✭✭✭VillageIdiot71


    FledNanders wrote: »
    <...>

    As far as I can tell Maeve O'Rourke's (excellent) piece in the The Journal is simply calling for victims to be able to access their own data should they wish to, not a blanket revealing of all names involved to be splashed across newspapers etc, and this message is getting lost.
    Is this not simply something that could be challenged in the Courts?

    Folk either have the right to read these records that relate to them, or they don't.

    The Oireachtas either has the power to both preserve and prevent access to these records, or they don't.


  • #161
    techdiver
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭techdiver


    Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »
    No they cannot. Many mothers have been actively looking for the names and whereabouts of their forcibly adopted children and whether they are alive or dead. The religious orders have blocked them time and time again. They are running out of time.

    Well then to me, this is the big issue. Hiding documents from the victims has no justification and provisions should have been made in the bill to remedy this.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Amirani
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    smurgen wrote: »
    The AG's position is not legally binding. So the attorney general is free to subvert GDPR (EU Law) at will and the Government is powerless to challenge it? Sounds like a total spoof and more of the hiding behind questionable guidance such as Seamus Woulfe saying rent freezes etc were unconstitutional and the government hiding behind that advice.

    Why would you as a minister decide that you know the legality of something better than the Attorney General, and ignore their advice?


  • #163
    Heighway61
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,972 ✭✭✭Heighway61


    TUSLA? The mere mention of that name chills the blood in my veins.


  • #164
    political analyst
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,593 ✭✭✭political analyst


    smurgen wrote: »
    Why? There's people in their 30/40's now that were in those homes. Nazi's are still being trialled 75 years after WW2 ended.

    At best, that comparison is quite a stretch!

    Besides, none of those former SS men who have stood trial in recent years has been imprisoned. Furthermore, the legal system in Germany is very different from common law.

    A better comparison to make would be the prosecutions of British military veterans of the Troubles - and what some nuns allegedly did is pale by comparison with Bloody Sunday.


  • #165
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,418 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    FFFGg probably just want to seal the records for 30 years so that all the victims still alive today will have passed by the time the seal is done.

    THEN they'll turn around and say: but all those deceased victims didn't want their names out in public in the first place so we have to respect their wishes and keep all this buried.


  • #166
    D.Q
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,054 ✭✭✭D.Q


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    FFFGg probably just want to seal the records for 30 years so that all the victims still alive today will have passed by the time the seal is done.

    THEN they'll turn around and say: but all those deceased victims didn't want their names out in public in the first place so we have to respect their wishes and keep all this buried.

    There's no way that FF isn't some way implicated in this. The power the church wielded in Ireland in the 20th century would have been very alluring to those self serving, shameless rats.

    Listen to the politicians and priests. They know best.

    Two sides of the same despicable coin as far as I'm concerned.


  • #167
    a_squirrelman
    Registered Users Posts: 604 ✭✭✭a_squirrelman


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    FFFGg probably just want to seal the records for 30 years so that all the victims still alive today will have passed by the time the seal is done.

    THEN they'll turn around and say: but all those deceased victims didn't want their names out in public in the first place so we have to respect their wishes and keep all this buried.


    Look at the big brain on BluePlanet, has it all sussed out.


  • #168
    Cluedo Monopoly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,605 ✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    techdiver wrote: »
    Well then to me, this is the big issue. Hiding documents from the victims has no justification and provisions should have been made in the bill to remedy this.

    Yes it is criminal that those mothers looking for details about their own children (dead or alive) can be refused by the religious orders and the state has never stepped in to help. Many people just want to bury our sordid past under the carpet. Warped really.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • #169
    Tired Gardener
    Closed Accounts Posts: 456 ✭✭Tired Gardener


    I can see the point being raised about people's privacy. However, not allowing ammendments to be added that work with this in mind to help the victims just comes across as a cover up.


  • #170
    VillageIdiot71
    Registered Users Posts: 578 ✭✭✭VillageIdiot71


    D.Q wrote: »
    There's no way that FF isn't some way implicated in this. The power the church wielded in Ireland in the 20th century would have been very alluring to those self serving, shameless rats.

    Listen to the politicians and priests. They know best.

    Two sides of the same despicable coin as far as I'm concerned.
    Fine, if that's what you think.

    Why would a Green Minister, and former law lecturer in DCU, be such a willing participant in such a move?


  • #171
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,110 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    VillageIdiot71 wrote: »
    Fine, if that's what you think.

    Why would a Green Minister, and former law lecturer in DCU, be such a willing participant in such a move?

    Because they have a Catholic lizard hind brain installed via early childhood indoctrination that overules more laterly acquired faculties of reasoning. That Jesuit moto of let me have my way with a boy till he's seven and I'll give you the man thing wasn't concocted appropos of nothing.

    The ongoing nonsense of the maternity hospital is rationally inexplicable.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Cluedo Monopoly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,605 ✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    cnocbui wrote: »
    Because they have a Catholic lizard hind brain installed via early childhood indoctrination that overules more laterly acquired faculties of reasoning. That Jesuit moto of let me have my way with a boy till he's seven and I'll give you the man thing wasn't concocted appropos of nothing.

    The ongoing nonsense of the maternity hospital is rationally inexplicable.

    Great post.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • #173
    political analyst
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,593 ✭✭✭political analyst


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Afaik, the deadline now is to ensure they can release a 4,000 page report at the end of the month. On publication the data was due to be either destroyed or locked up for 30 years. This is a way of sidestepping this issue.

    Some academics have pointed out the Gov could just delay the publication but this is going on for 16 years at this point, why delay it further?

    As a society we are nowhere near ready to discuss the abuse that still happens behind closed doors in Ireland.

    Sexual abuse of children has dominated the main-stream media in Ireland since 1994 and so gardaí take these crimes very seriously.

    So I don't see how there is an unwillingness to discuss child abuse in Ireland today, to be honest!


  • #174
    political analyst
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,593 ✭✭✭political analyst


    Sierra Oscar wrote: »
    How can we ever expect people to come forward and co-operate with Commissions of Investigation and Inquiries in the future if the Government reneges on a commitment it made to privacy, written into law?

    This decision is so difficult for so many people and seems cruel. However the Government have little other option all the same. The Commission would never have gotten off the ground if that commitment to privacy was not made and this whole discussion wouldn't have even arisen. Worth keeping that in mind.

    Exactly.

    I just cannot comprehend the unwillingness of both the Adoption Rights Alliance and Justice for Magdalenes to accept that.


  • #175
    McMurphy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    VillageIdiot71 wrote: »
    Absolutely. The criticism being made of the Minister is clearly fueled by homophobia.

    Apt username.


  • #176
    jiltloop
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭jiltloop


    landofthetree wrote: »
    So these women who had these kids dont have a right to privacy?

    They could have if a simple amendment to the bill was entertained.


  • #177
    Amirani
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    jiltloop wrote: »
    They could have if a simple amendment to the bill was entertained.

    I'm hearing that the bill needed to be passed this week owing to the Oireachtas recess next week and the proposed destruction of data on October 30th, so there wouldn't be time to debate amendments.

    I'm not sure how accurate this is.

    https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1319592806026039298


  • #178
    Amirani
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    Government breaking the law by sealing mother and baby homes records, says DPC: https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40070054.html

    Plot thickens on this. Seems like it could lead to a Supreme Court case perhaps?


  • #179
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,418 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    It's probably going to take some court challenges and eventually a government lead by the Left to Unseal these documents and then the irish people can hold FFFG feet to the fire.


  • #180
    McMurphy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    Amirani wrote: »
    Government breaking the law by sealing mother and baby homes records, says DPC: https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40070054.html

    Plot thickens on this. Seems like it could lead to a Supreme Court case perhaps?

    Seamus Woulfe might end up getting that gig.......


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,363 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Amirani wrote: »
    Government breaking the law by sealing mother and baby homes records, says DPC: https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40070054.html

    Plot thickens on this. Seems like it could lead to a Supreme Court case perhaps?

    In that article the minister for children says he needs to do a better job of communicating on the reasons for this bill. Did any communication skills these people had go the way of the dodo at some point this year ? It’s just constant **** ups in communication about serious issues.

    I mean maybe there is a legal reason that this needs to be done then if it was communicated better then there may be more support for it as the reasoning may be justified. And I don’t often say this often but RBB a makes a good point because the perception of the reasoning for this action doesn’t look good because whatever legitimate reason there is hasn’t be spelled out properly.

    I’m right in thinking that advice of the AG to the government is like any legal advice to any ordinary punter in that it’s just advice. They aren’t bound by that advice is my point. I ask that because it seems an easy cover to say “the AG said this or said that.”


  • #182
    LostinBlanch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,907 ✭✭✭LostinBlanch


    There's also another angle that nobody has mentioned. Children in Mother and Baby Homes were "volunteered" as subjects in medical trials for which you can be sure the nuns were well paid.

    Broadsheet.ie has a timeline on the whole sca scheme.

    Take two minutes and read through the whole thing. Disgusting.


  • #183
    tipptom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,219 ✭✭✭tipptom


    VillageIdiot71 wrote: »
    Fine, if that's what you think.

    Why would a Green Minister, and former law lecturer in DCU, be such a willing participant in such a move?

    You do know that they are now in the cult of FG/FF now and they have to go along with it

    As if a law lecturer or a green minister is above the sh@t of the rest of the Gombeens in the Dail.

    Thats like saying "why would a man of the cloth be willing to participate in raping young boys,sure we all know that the ones in the highest stations in Irealnd are above all that.


  • #184
    dundalkfc10
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,719 ✭✭✭dundalkfc10


    Amirani wrote: »
    Government breaking the law by sealing mother and baby homes records, says DPC: https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40070054.html

    Plot thickens on this. Seems like it could lead to a Supreme Court case perhaps?

    As I have said Scumbags


  • #185
    bb1234567
    Registered Users Posts: 5,513 ✭✭✭bb1234567


    _Brian wrote: »
    My question here is who is pushing for this ??

    The government are taking allot of flack making this decision, but I can’t see why they are so adamant to go ahead and seal them.

    And I presume a subsequent government can change this decision.

    At least 20 years before a different government can overturn the decision I believe. It's a scandal, I can't believe it and not what we expect of an open and democratic government, there needs to be a consequence for this, the relatives of these people need honesty and closure and those people's plights can't be hidden for any longer


  • #186
    a_squirrelman
    Registered Users Posts: 604 ✭✭✭a_squirrelman


    tipptom wrote: »
    [/B]
    You do know that they are now in the cult of FG/FF now and they have to go along with it

    As if a law lecturer or a green minister is above the sh@t of the rest of the Gombeens in the Dail.

    Thats like saying "why would a man of the cloth be willing to participate in raping young boys,sure we all know that the ones in the highest stations in Irealnd are above all that.


    Has anyone gone past the outrage and headlines to actually listen to what this is about?

    Read the points, 1 to 15.


    https://twitter.com/Costellop/status/1319376703374938112?fbclid=IwAR1ZA9FTnaPmoJdR4EOkva-h2UyNDeKzOd8w3OKCrDPVXC0K-6g_ZcmxEqY

    Seems to me like the right thing was done.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,594 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    VillageIdiot71 wrote: »
    Absolutely. The criticism being made of the Minister is clearly fueled by homophobia.

    Ridiculous. Have you seen his critics? Not exactly typical homophobes.

    I suspect many of his critics don't even know he's gay. I think we're all passed and used to gay politicians at this stage.


  • #188
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    a_squirrelman wrote: »
    Has anyone gone past the outrage and headlines to actually listen to what this is about?

    Read the points, 1 to 15.


    https://twitter.com/Costellop/status/1319376703374938112?fbclid=IwAR1ZA9FTnaPmoJdR4EOkva-h2UyNDeKzOd8w3OKCrDPVXC0K-6g_ZcmxEqY

    Seems to me like the right thing was done.

    Absolutely. I see Ivana Bacik asking for the report to be further delayed, as though 16 years isn't long enough.


  • #189
    tipptom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,219 ✭✭✭tipptom


    a_squirrelman wrote: »
    Has anyone gone past the outrage and headlines to actually listen to what this is about?

    Read the points, 1 to 15.


    https://twitter.com/Costellop/status/1319376703374938112?fbclid=IwAR1ZA9FTnaPmoJdR4EOkva-h2UyNDeKzOd8w3OKCrDPVXC0K-6g_ZcmxEqY

    Seems to me like the right thing was done.

    That was not my point.


  • #190
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,110 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    GarIT wrote: »
    What if the children don't want them to know. If you give a child up for adoption you give up any future right to info. Once the child is adopted it's not their child. The issue that complicates things here is some were forced to give their kids up for adoption.

    Have you considered that sometimes there are medical reasons based on genetics where relatives may wish to seek one another out? Just because one person wants anonymity, doesn't mean everyone does and it certainly doesn't ethically justify blanket prohibition.

    It's not hard to have an intermediary who asks B if they want A to know of their existence.


  • #191
    iLikeWaffles
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    It's an absolute sickening disgrace for all those involved and affected by it.

    Now what are you all going to do about it!

    The bill still needs to be signed by the President. I haven't seen a single person say they are not disgusted by this. Because of restrictions we can't march in unity but that doesn't mean nothing can be done.

    Who can say they are confident in the current government's ability to serve its people?


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,418 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    iLikeWaffles wrote: »
    It's an absolute sickening disgrace for all those involved and affected by it.

    Now what are you all going to do about it!

    The bill still needs to be signed by the President. I haven't seen a single person say they are not disgusted by this. Because of restrictions we can't march in unity but that doesn't mean nothing can be done.

    Who can say they are confident in the current government's ability to serve its people?

    What can we do?
    This shower have barricaded themselves in government and none of them will collapse it because they'll be destroyed if the ppl get to vote again.


  • #193
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,110 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Sinn Fein, looking good. The only political party at the last election with a policy that included a tax reduction.


  • #194
    TheChizler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,474 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    iLikeWaffles wrote: »
    I haven't seen a single person say they are not disgusted by this.
    I'm disgusted by the misinformation, and opportunism by the opposition, does that count?


  • #195
    s1ippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,980 ✭✭✭s1ippy


    Controversial legislation on mother and baby homes records passed by Seanad (via @IrishTimes) https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/controversial-legislation-on-mother-and-baby-homes-records-passed-by-seanad-1.4389672

    Some sense, thankfully. Roderic apologised but I don't really see that removing the spit from the faces of all who he insulted by allowing it to get this far. Every TD who voted in favour it should be absolutely ashamed.


  • #196
    The Hound Gone Wild
    Registered Users Posts: 255 ✭✭The Hound Gone Wild


    s1ippy wrote: »
    Controversial legislation on mother and baby homes records passed by Seanad (via @IrishTimes) https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/controversial-legislation-on-mother-and-baby-homes-records-passed-by-seanad-1.4389672

    Some sense, thankfully. Roderic apologised but I don't really see that removing the spit from the faces of all who he insulted by allowing it to get this far. Every TD who voted in favour it should be absolutely ashamed.

    We're nearly 24h after the fact and people are still posting things like this? How? How have people not taken the time to see what actually happened.

    People need to not swallow information from FB & Twitter. We'll end up with a Trump if we don't have a properly informed electorate.


  • #197
    iLikeWaffles
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    TheChizler wrote: »
    I'm disgusted by the misinformation, and opportunism by the opposition, does that count?

    It doesn't actually, no. Sorry.

    Simple fact of the matter is if a person who has been affected by the sealing of records is defeated by the Governments unwillingness or empathy then that Government does not deserve office furthermore the fact that it was an unanimous Ta vote from those who have a seat in Government this should raise eyebrows. These records show the very essence and soul of where an affected person comes from. Not a single person on the planet has the right or justification to deny that persons very existence and the longing that person has always sought to find out what and who they are.

    It is very easy and quiet frankly shameless for you to say what you have just said here because your existence has always been known to you. But unfortunately there are many thousands of people in Ireland that do not know where they come from or the circumstances that lead them into the state of depression (in most causes) and bewilderment as to who they are.

    Now stop thinking about yourself, the world does not revolve around your overwhelmingly self centered attitude.


  • #198
    Hermy
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 11,426 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hermy


    There's been a lot of talk in this thread about privacy.

    But people's right to privacy already exists in law in Ireland.

    What's at issue here is not privacy but secrecy.

    And successive governments seem determined to keep the institutional abuses of the past shrouded in secrecy come what may.

    Take me as an example.

    I'm adopted and consequently, unlike everybody else, I don't have the right to know who my biological parents are.

    There is no justification for this whatsoever - neither legally nor morally nor any other way - in my opinion.

    Through my own endeavours I managed to trace my birth mother and when I made contact she agreed to see me.

    She was glad to meet me but sadly she was in poor health and passed away not long after that meeting.

    However, her family invited me to her funeral and despite the sad occasion it was a very good day with her three children together for the first time under the one roof.

    Yet despite meeting her, being invited to her funeral, and being made to feel very welcome by her immediate and extended family I still can't officially be told her name.

    In fact I can't even be told my own name - the name I was born with.

    And don't get me started on my birth father whose name is known to TUSLA but not by me - his son!

    So regardless of whatever misunderstandings there may be about the passing of this legislation - and sometimes I think those misunderstandings are desired by the powers that be - the fact remains that those of us who were victims of past institutional abuses in Ireland are always swimming against the tide when we attempt to discover the story of our past.

    And as has already been asked in thread I constantly ask myself why is this so?

    Whose interests are being served by denying people the right to know where they came from?

    And who is being protected by this veil of secrecy that still pervades, and from whom are they being protected?

    Genealogy Forum Mod



  • #199
    political analyst
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,593 ✭✭✭political analyst


    'Sierra Oscar' explained the sealing of the records on this thread that I started a week ago.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058122894&page=4
    How can we ever expect people to come forward and co-operate with Commissions of Investigation and Inquiries in the future if the Government reneges on a commitment it made to privacy, written into law?

    This decision is so difficult for so many people and seems cruel. However the Government have little other option all the same. The Commission would never have gotten off the ground if that commitment to privacy was not made and this whole discussion wouldn't have even arisen. Worth keeping that in mind.

    Why won't the Adoption Rights Alliance and Justice for Magdalenes accept that?


  • #200
    TP_CM
    Registered Users Posts: 443 ✭✭TP_CM


    Am I in tin foil hat territory to suggest that perhaps the government's commission actually offered anonymity (perhaps in a forceful or persuasive way) to the witnesses? At the moment they're presenting it as if the witnesses asked for this anonymity.

    What if they had thought of this moment all along, and knew that the only way everything could be locked away would be to agree anonymity to the witnesses? It would leave them in the perfect position to say later (which is now) that "Sorry we promised anonymity so we need to lock everything away now". What if the witnesses had no problems with testimonials going public?

    I don't understand why the witnesses wouldn't want their story made public (with names redacted)..


  • #201
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    Amirani wrote: »
    Why would you as a minister decide that you know the legality of something better than the Attorney General, and ignore their advice?

    It's just me with a problem with this?

    https://twitter.com/irishexaminer/status/1319704057397870593?s=19


  • Advertisement
Advertisement