"Significant" numbers of babies remains actually found

Graces7

bubblypop wrote: »

This isn't just an Irish or Catholic thing either.
Many many hundreds, if not thousands of English children from the same kind of homes were shipped off to Canada or Australia over the years. It was cheaper for the state then keep them.
In Australia, the state took aboriginal children away from their families and placed them in white homes.
It appears to me that it was something that happened, of a time, it was everybody's attitude.

We should be grateful we live now, when children are protected as much as possible

In all the cases you mention? it was the Church. They taught the state well.

Grayson

I remember watching the late late as a child in the 80's. There was a priest on it who was saying that bastards (his words) were inherently sinful since they were conceived in sin. They could not be redeemed.

Post independance an idea solidified which had been around for a while. This was that Ireland was a moral catholic country. Irishness was tied to this. The state used it to partly define what Irishness was. I'm not sure where it started. Was it the church pushing the government or the nationalists in government using the church. I have a feeling it was symbiotic since it benefited both parties.

Unmarried women had no part in this. The state needed to do something about it, but rather than give them support they abrogated responsibility to the church. And as we know no, the church were bastards about it. Unmarried mothers were generally viewed as one of the following; insane, women who had made a stupid mistake and were fallen and finally as women who could not be redeemed. However in each case the standard catholic view was that women needed to be punished as a penance.

It's also worth noting that these homes didn't differ much from workhouses. In Madness and Civilisation, Foucault points out that the first workhouses were created by Vincent De Paul. The prevailing view at the time was that being poor and/or lazy was a sin and bad for the soul. The houses that were set up for the destitute had strict regimes of hard labour and prayer to redeem these lost souls. The Laundries had the same view.

As for the children, they were viewed as the product of sin. They had to live hard lives for them to have a chance of overcoming the sin of their birth.

We really were a horrific people back then.

The_Kew_Tour

Its beyond awful or sad.

My Dad and myself had argument about this before. My Dad would be like "times were better in our day", but then when you read about this, how can anyone say that!

and I reckon people are living in homes and buried are dozens beneath. Who knows mine could be too for all I know.

Graces7

lazybones32 wrote: »

And how much is "significant quantities"?
I don't see what causes you such shock - even the picture in the link shows that it is known there are people buried there. They had enough time to put up a plaque.

People need to tread carefully before swallowing whatever the papers print - they've already had to issue an apology for deliberately misleading in relation to this issue.

Th eplaque etc was the work of local folk who knew what was going on but were powereless. Same at Bessborough in Cork and elsewhere.

I think you need to be aware of the sheert otal power the church had over sociery in those days.

The irony is that if it had not been fr the clerical child abuse? They really thought they would never be found out.

scuse typos; deeply upset.

Oh and thr report is not from papers but officialsources.

Samaris

Graces - hope you don't mind me saying, but you sound like you're having a physical reaction to the shock. Will it be taken amiss if I suggest you have a cup of hot tea or something similar and wrap a blanket around yourself?

No sarcasm, but you sound upset by it all (and it's an awful thing) so just saying that from concern.

percy212

I think this is the crux of the matter. The women and babies placed in these institutions were seen as profitable goods. The women were worked, the babies were sold, or worse died.

For those who "died", I often wondered if there were any relationships with American drug companies for the purposes of human testing. Worth exploring by a journalist..

jimgoose wrote: »

These people were in the business of selling "fresh" babies for money. To that end, skilled accountants as many of them were, keeping the "cost of goods sold" as it were, minimal was of great concern. This meant minimal food, minimal heating, minimal medical care, minimal everything. Including funeral expense. The State were certainly in collusion with this, given that it was a far cheaper option than doing it's duty in this matter. For money. At this point I am all for declaring this an attempted genocide, a military matter, and shooting a few of these disgusting rat-bastards in the yard at Dublin Castle. :mad:

Graces7

endacl wrote: »

The septic tank however, was not introduced to the UK until the latter years of the 19th century. The site in question can't be explained away with 'sure those remains are probably much older than the institution'.

read the breaking news articel. remains dated from 50s

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/latest-other-mother-and-baby-homes-must-also-be-investigated-779840.html

Graces7

percy212 wrote: »

I think this is the crux of the matter. The women and babies placed in these institutions were seen as profitable goods. The women were worked, the babies were sold, or worse died.

For those who "died", I often wondered if there were any relationships with American drug companies for the purposes of human testing. Worth exploring by a journalist..

there were vaccine trials. this has been known years. read ryan and murphy

percy212

I didn't know that Graces7. Thanks for that info. I will do some reading. There we have it then. Sell the good kids, and experiment on the ones that can't be exported. What a country.

Graces7 wrote: »

there were vaccine trials. this has been known years. read ryan and murphy

SEPT 23 1989

I presume the privacy tents are being erected and the diggers are moving in as we speak like would happen in any other civilised country

Graces7

Samaris wrote: »

Graces - hope you don't mind me saying, but you sound like you're having a physical reaction to the shock. Will it be taken amiss if I suggest you have a cup of hot tea or something similar and wrap a blanket around yourself?

No sarcasm, but you sound upset by it all (and it's an awful thing) so just saying that from concern.

Thanks and yes, for reasons I cannot explain in the forums.deeply, deeply upset and hot sweet coffee already drunk and hot water bottles.

as I have said, been dreading this for two years and more and it is far worse then we thought and far more ahead, believe me.

is OK; have family involved and have talked to them on the phone.

will be fine later.. I promise.

I think too that many many strong and faithful catholics will be deeply distresses. My faith is in the Lord Jesus Christ beyond and above the Church and it not on any doubt or danger. Thankfully. As an abuse survivor too...

sincere thanks for your kindness! Blessings and peace

whisky_galore

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

My Dad would be like "times were better in our day", but then when you read about this, how can anyone say that!

Rose-tinted bollocks.
Everyone was supposed to know their place. There was a thin veneer of respectability, people turfed their own flesh and blood out of their homes and into an institution because they had 'sinned'.
People should have at least suspected if not knew full well they were not nice places to end up in.

juno10353

The 800 or so babies who died in the Mother and baby home in Tuam at that time had Death certificates, but never had burial details, nor were they listed in official burial grounds. When this was investigated it was rumoured that the burials had taken place on site. Now this is confirmed. This is not consecrated ground, but the site of old sewage pit. It has been claimed in past that bodies had not been buried in coffins, but just disguarded. It would seem now that evidence supports this total disrespect for young lives lost in Bons Secour Mother and Baby Home

The_Kew_Tour

wow I knew of coverups and I guess you will always hear stories that will shock you and new things come out.

I knew things were bad, but if the links are true, then my God we had our own deep dark history.

Snickers Man

dav3 wrote: »

People have certainly remained calm since the beginning of this investigation which has lasted a number of years. I don't see many people being irrational.

Let it remain so then. But there ARE some statements here, and I am mainly limiting my comments to statements made here, that are inflammatory, intemperate and misleading. For example :

Were some children at Mother and Baby Homes used for medical research?
This is a contentious issue. There was some evidence that the bodies of some children from Mother and Baby Homes were given to anatomy departments in Irish universities for medical research.

Now I accept that donating a dead body to science should only be done with the prior agreement of the person itself, if they were an adult, or their rightful parents/guardians if they were a child but there is a clear difference between the meaning of the question, which implies that experiments were carried out on living children, and the answer which is clearly about experiments on corpses. This is an example, I suggest, of presumptuous and biased reporting masquerading as fact checking.

I also accept that there is evidence that vaccine trials were carried out on living children from similar homes in the 1930s and that there is no government record of same, although references were made to the trials in medical journals. It seems to have been common practice at the time. Should our anger be directed at the medical profession retrospectively?

dav3 wrote: »

The mortality rates alone in these mother and baby homes were extremely high.

Not doubting that they were hardly first-class medical facilities but it's quite difficult to compare statistically a home predominantly inhabited by infants/young children who were, let's face it, mainly from the poorer sections of society with attendant lower levels of health and "society in general." Hospitals have higher death rates than family homes statistically speaking. But that's because they're full of sick people.

I'm trying not to be facetious, just pointing out that statistical comparisons are difficult to carry out fairly.

Bargain Blake

Anyone want to take an intelligent guess at how many people will be charged with any crimes for what amounts to nothing short of genocide?

sjb25

I don't even no what to say about this (unusual for me)
What a shower of fcuking evil basterds
Preaching to everyone letting on they where better than everyone
Any nonsense that it was different times etc etc is bulsh1t scum is all they are

Grayson

Snickers Man wrote: »

Not doubting that they were hardly first-class medical facilities but it's quite difficult to compare statistically a home predominantly inhabited by infants/young children who were, let's face it, mainly from the poorer sections of society with attendant lower levels of health and "society in general." Hospitals have higher death rates than family homes statistically speaking. But that's because they're full of sick people.

I'm trying not to be facetious, just pointing out that statistical comparisons are difficult to carry out fairly.

They do have stats for the mortality rate of children from married and unmarried mothers. Now being unmarried doesn't mean that they were in one of the homes but it is likely. The children of unmarried mothers had a mortality rate of nearly 3 times that of married mothers.

sjb25

Bargain Blake wrote: »

Anyone want to take an intelligent guess at how many people will be charged with any crimes for what amounts to nothing short of genocide?

ZERO

One of these was in a field in Tuam. They're not totally certain how many bodies were there. The farmer that owned the field was such an arse and wouldn't let any of the still living family members visit or even put up a plaque commemorating the fact. For years he refused. Until the farmer that owned the neighbouring field opened up a portion of it, paved a path, and allowed the people to put up a marker with some of the names of the babies that were known to be there - many came from the same family.

From what I remember, if the baby died before it was baptized, it was just dumped in this field. Many times the mothers were never told where their baby was taken.

The_Kew_Tour

I know this may sound insignificant and maybe to some little petty of me, but I am am little disgusted at RTE website that this does not seem to be the main headline.

This really is a brutally shocking story developing. I know its not the first find, but still.

Sorry if im being ott.

whisky_galore

Deleted User wrote: »

One of these was in a field in Tuam. They're not totally certain how many bodies were there. The farmer that owned the field was such an arse and wouldn't let any of the still living family members visit or even put up a plaque commemorating the fact. For years he refused. Until the farmer that owned the neighbouring field opened up a portion of it, paved a path, and allowed the people to put up a marker with some of the names of the babies that were known to be there - many came from the same family.

From what I remember, if the baby died before it was baptized, it was just dumped in this field. Many times the mothers were never told where their baby was taken.

These were widespread, and called cillíní, places where unbaptised and suicides and anyone else that couldn't be respectfully buried in a normal graveyard according to the morals of the time.

Snickers Man

juno10353 wrote: »

The 800 or so babies who died in the Mother and baby home in Tuam at that time had Death certificates, but never had burial details, nor were they listed in official burial grounds. When this was investigated it was rumoured that the burials had taken place on site. Now this is confirmed. This is not consecrated ground, but the site of old sewage pit. It has been claimed in past that bodies had not been buried in coffins, but just disguarded. It would seem now that evidence supports this total disrespect for young lives lost in Bons Secour Mother and Baby Home

I totally agree. And I think the Church's recent statements on how Catholics should only bury the cremated remains of their loved ones on consecrated ground ring somewhat hollow when compared with their shabby treatment of the dead at these homes.

But is any of that a secular crime? ie against the law of the land? I don't know whether there is a requirement to inform the authorities exactly where a dead body has been buried once you have notified them of the death itself. As seems to have been done here. Does anybody know the legal position?

SILVAMAN

Outrageous institution the Catholic Church.
It ought to be disestablished in Ireland, the leaders arrested, property seized and used to compensate victims, and the churches returned to parishes on the condition that they the people own them, and that there is no money sent to or contact with Rome.

Graces7

Deleted User wrote: »

One of these was in a field in Tuam. They're not totally certain how many bodies were there. The farmer that owned the field was such an arse and wouldn't let any of the still living family members visit or even put up a plaque commemorating the fact. For years he refused. Until the farmer that owned the neighbouring field opened up a portion of it, paved a path, and allowed the people to put up a marker with some of the names of the babies that were known to be there - many came from the same family.

From what I remember, if the baby died before it was baptized, it was just dumped in this field. Many times the mothers were never told where their baby was taken.

All unbaptised babies and eg suicides were buried in unconsecrated ground, called the killeeens.. no names . no memorials.

No heaven or hell;limbo. That idea was done away with

Some places have put up plaques and consecrated the ground. Many farmers refused to allow access.

Story of a midwife who did not want dying twin newborns to go there and baptised them.. the only name she could think of was Mary so they are both Mary on the gravestone .. the Abbey, Donegal Town

Dr Crayfish

Makes me sick, that scum organisation. The fact that people still go to their churches is just incredible. My mind f*cking boggles. Support these paedophiles and murderers. They should be burned to the ground every last Catholic organisation on this island.

lazybones32

Graces7 wrote: »

Th eplaque etc was the work of local folk who knew what was going on but were powereless. Same at Bessborough in Cork and elsewhere.

I think you need to be aware of the sheert otal power the church had over sociery in those days.

The irony is that if it had not been fr the clerical child abuse? They really thought they would never be found out.

scuse typos; deeply upset.

Oh and thr report is not from papers but officialsources.

This isn't exactly breaking news though, so I fail to see why someone gets upset despite this being known (to a degree) for some time.
The Gardai are still investigating, so I'll not act as judge, jury and executioner on anyone or any institution until more information is known - and I'd advise others to do the same but I won't hold my breath...

The papers used Corless' paper to run with their stories too but ended up inventing quotes and passing them off as source material. The Indo, in particular, should be viewed with very cautious eyes....I don't trust them to give the correct date.

KKkitty

My mother was in a mother and baby home in the early 70's. Whilst in labour a nun slapped her in the face because my mother dared to scream with the the pain of childbirth. The nun told her to shut up and said that's what you get for your sins. This discovery is only the tip of the iceberg. These poor babies didn't ask for this and the state should cut all ties with the CC but won't. This is an absolute disgrace but the CC will find some way out of it, they always do.

pilly

bubblypop wrote: »

This isn't just an Irish or Catholic thing either.
Many many hundreds, if not thousands of English children from the same kind of homes were shipped off to Canada or Australia over the years. It was cheaper for the state then keep them.
In Australia, the state took aboriginal children away from their families and placed them in white homes.
It appears to me that it was something that happened, of a time, it was everybody's attitude.

We should be grateful we live now, when children are protected as much as possible

Like Grace was?

pilly

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't see any defense for anyone apart for the mothers and babies who were dumped/born in these places, and who were given no choice.

Maybe it was deflection you were looking for then RobertKK. Why bring up the fact that parents put young women into these homes? 2 wrongs do not make a right whatever way you look at it.