"Significant" numbers of babies remains actually found

B_Wayne

lazybones32 wrote: »

Kind of proving my point there...the children were buried in a plot beside the septic tank; not quite as sensational as "800 babies dumped in a septic tank" that was peddled and later retracted (i.e. they admitted they lied in printing that part, yet the misinformation still persists).

I want to form my judgments based on the truth - don't you?

The commission report said bodies were found in a second structure which was probably used for the containment or treatment of sewage. The bizarre levels of diversion and obfuscation you're engaging is worrying.

Your focus is the media which is the exact same thing Prone did to divert attention on behalf of the orders. Why are you not outraged by the fact that they wished to cover it up?

SEPT 23 1989

lazybones32 wrote: »

Kind of proving my point there...the children were buried in a plot beside the septic tank; not quite as sensational as "800 babies dumped in a septic tank" that was peddled and later retracted (i.e. they admitted they lied in printing that part, yet the misinformation still persists).

I want to form my judgments based on the truth - don't you?

Have a ljsten back to today's Liveline listen to one of the callers who fell into one of them while playing as a child

Listen to her description

neonsofa

It is so sad to think about.
I'm a single mother and I have raised a wonderful child with the help of society. From the teachers in my school when I was a young pregnant teenager, the hospital staff who educated and encouraged me, my parents who albeit not exactly thrilled in the beginning but who stayed loyal and in my corner from day one. The state who offered me my free education to get the job I have today, jobseekers assistance and FIS when I was out of work or unable to find work that paid enough to cover the childcare. Childminders who look after her so I can go to work and provide for her. Her teachers from the school that is, as much as I may resent the fact, a Catholic school. It absolutely takes a village to raise a child, and as a single parent I am so grateful for everybody who helps me in parenting. If it had happened to me in what is really only a few years back, this is what could have happened to my child. Two wasted lives. Society would have done this to us instead. It's absolutely crazy to think about.

kylith

Neyite wrote: »

Maintenance to the homes was covered by the local authorities, so the nuns didnt have to worry about the costs of upkeep.

So in addition to being paid the average industrial wage (anyone know by the way how much that was, or how much it may be in todays money?) by the state to look after these mothers and children (which would support a single family with lots and lots of children outside the walls of the home), made money from slave labour, they also got a whopper amount of money for the adoptions.

And still, the little ones were malnourished?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The Church could really use an English teacher to explain to them the actual meaning of 'suffer the little children.

dav3

lazybones32 wrote: »

Kind of proving my point there...the children were buried in a plot beside the septic tank; not quite as sensational as "800 babies dumped in a septic tank" that was peddled and later retracted (i.e. they admitted they lied in printing that part, yet the misinformation still persists).

I want to form my judgments based on the truth - don't you?

It doesn't appear that your judgements are based on the truth.

The type of tank is now irrelevant. Whether it was a septic tank or not, it doesn't make the actions any less horrific.

The "truth" is below.

Test trenches were dug revealing two large structures. One structure appears to be a large sewage containment system or septic tank that had been decommissioned and filled with rubble and debris and then covered with top soil.

The second structure is a long structure which is divided into 20 chambers.

The Commission has not yet determined what the purpose of this structure was but it appears to be related to the treatment/containment of sewage and/or waste water.

The Commission has also not yet determined if it was ever used for this purpose.

KKkitty

please helpThank YOU wrote: »

Sorry for what happened to your mother but.its the state who did this.

IMO the state is as culpable as the church. They never disputed anything the church did no matter how wrong it was and still is. They can release all the statements they want, have all the tribunals they like but unless names of the culprits are revealed and people are jailed the suffering of the women who were put through this will never be OK. It's not ok anyway but there are many women in this country who are scarred for life by what they went through and still go through.

Parchment

The state allowed it but the church caused it with all their fear mongering and shaming of people.

I hope all those with their ashes on their foreheads this week can truely believe in such an organization.

please helpThank YOU

My Grandmother was pregnant with my mother in the 1950s she was unmarried and she had to leave Ireland to have my mother in the UK because Society turned on her and she was told leave Ireland you are not welcome and people would name call her WITH THE LIKES YOU ARE HAVING THE DEVILS CHILD. all of her friends turned there backs on her she was all alone and outcast. my Grandmother was asked to go into one of the homes like in tuam in Galway .my Grandmother all way says holly Ireland and she will never forget what happened to her . and its still the same turn on the radio and there on about unmarried women in 2017 .

neonsofa

please helpThank YOU wrote: »

My Grandmother was pregnant with my mother in the 1950s she was unmarried and she had to leave Ireland to have my mother in the UK because Society turned on her and she was told leave Ireland you are not welcome and people would name call her WITH THE LIKES YOU ARE HAVING THE DEVILS CHILD. all of her friends turned there backs on her she was all alone and outcast. my Grandmother was asked to go into one of the homes like in tuam in Galway .my Grandmother all way says holly Ireland and she will never forget what happened to her . and its still the same turn on the radio and there on about unmarried women in 2017 .

So sad but I can't agree it is still the same.

steddyeddy

My aunt had her knuckles broken by a nun in her normal non industrial school. My gran, a tough no nonsense woman confronted the nun, who hid in her office until my granny was gone.

The same aunt was later "sent down the country" and won't talk about what happened.

Listen we can blame the church but some people, like my gran stood up to them when she could. Let's be honest, people were brought here by the Garda or there families and ultimately babies were killed. The Garda were also involved and if anyone of them is alive today well the best thing I wish them is a fast death.

These infants were killed based on how society viewed single mothers and the poorest in society. To this day you'll hear of single mothers and poorer people being singled out as being the cause of societies problems ect but the real Irish heros and those who fought against that stigma and those who died in these hell holes.

Rest in peace poor unfortunates. You were murdered by degenerates and placed in a septic tank to be forgotten, but you'll be the ones remembered and the Garda, priests and bible thumpers will be forgotten.

KKkitty

Parchment wrote: »

The state allowed it but the church caused it with all their fear mongering and shaming of people.

I hope all those with their ashes on their foreheads this week can truely believe in such an organization.

Whatever about dictating to people that they shouldn't have meat on certain days of the year forcing mothers to give up their own children is heinous. Being made feel like they were horrible women for getting pregnant outside marriage. No one to stick up for you no matter what.

steddyeddy

KKkitty wrote: »

IMO the state is as culpable as the church. They never disputed anything the church did no matter how wrong it was and still is. They can release all the statements they want, have all the tribunals they like but unless names of the culprits are revealed and people are jailed the suffering of the women who were put through this will never be OK. It's not ok anyway but there are many women in this country who are scarred for life by what they went through and still go through.

Yes they are. The garda brought people here.

steddyeddy

KKkitty wrote: »

Whatever about dictating to people that they shouldn't have meat on certain days of the year forcing mothers to give up their own children is heinous. Being made feel like they were horrible women for getting pregnant outside marriage. No one to stick up for you no matter what.

You know what KKKitty? People still judge single mothers. It hasn't gone away yet.

Snickers Man

dav3 wrote: »

The more you post, the more the mask slips. You can pontificate in this thread right to the end, but it’s certainly not going to win you many fans. The people have a fair idea at this stage the severity of this issue.

When you continually ask people to ‘calm down’ are you directing this at people within this thread debating the issues with facts, or the people who are still waiting for justice over half a century later?

I have no problem with people discussing the facts of the case. I have a problem with people histrionically exaggerating what happened and drawing wild conclusions that are not based on any facts at all.

Especially those (do I really have to link and quote them all?) who are talking about "genocide" and "murder". I even question (note that word) whether there is any likelihood of a crime, ie an infringement of the law, to be investigated at all. To that end I have asked (note: asked) if anybody knows whether there are laws concerning the disposal of dead bodies because I genuinely don't know the answer and nobody has yet furnished one.

Do you have any issue with my narrative of how events came to light, other than calling it "irrelevant"? If so, please do suggest corrections.

dav3 wrote: »

I will once again quote an email from Terry Prone written on behalf of the Bon Secours who had hired the communications clinic to carry out PR for them in relation to this.

The facts of the story so far, are that a group of people wanted to prevent this story from getting any more coverage then it already had.

Had all these deaths and ‘burials’ been legal and above board as you put in your hypothesis, it appears that these people went to extraordinary lengths to cover it up. The question would have to be asked why?

Terry Prone's letter, from its tone--you didn't leave the date in--seems to refer to a communication AFTER the story had broken. So she's hardly "covering up" something if it has already been made public is she?

She's a spin doctor. She's hired to give her clients' point of view on things. She is open to challenge and rebuttal. Do you have a problem with this? BTW I don't like the wagon at all and, in hindsight, she has clearly made a false statement when she says "You will find no mass grave". At the time of writing, however, she was strictly correct because CONTRARY TO REPORTS AT THE TIME no mass grave had been found.

Now it has.

Your sneering at my "hypothesis" that "all these deaths and burials were legal and above board" implies that you think there must have been something illegal or criminal afoot? What crime or crimes specifically do you think were committed and where is the evidence for them?

Now let ME repeat what I have said before. By the standards it claims and given the strictures it places on its own flock and their treatment of deceased loved ones the church has behaved hypocritically, callously and arrogantly to these people. But none of that is criminal. Being a bollox is not against the law, (fortunately).

If people want to "bring perpetrators to justice" they first of all have to identify a crime. And then they have to determine who was responsible.

Now what crimes are you talking about?

steddyeddy

Snickers Man wrote: »

I have no problem with people discussing the facts of the case. I have a problem with people histrionically exaggerating what happened and drawing wild conclusions that are not based on any facts at all.

Especially those (do I really have to link and quote them all?) who are talking about "genocide" and "murder". I even question (note that word) whether there is any likelihood of a crime, ie an infringement of the law, to be investigated at all. To that end I have asked (note: asked) if anybody knows whether there are laws concerning the disposal of dead bodies because I genuinely don't know the answer and nobody has yet furnished one.

Do you have any issue with my narrative of how events came to light, other than calling it "irrelevant"? If so, please do suggest corrections. Going by what we know of Catholic "care homes" it wasn't likely the babies were looked after.





Terry Prone's letter, from its tone--you didn't leave the date in--seems to refer to a communication AFTER the story had broken. So she's hardly "covering up" something if it has already been made public is she?

She's a spin doctor. She's hired to give her clients' point of view on things. She is open to challenge and rebuttal. Do you have a problem with this? BTW I don't like the wagon at all and, in hindsight, she has clearly made a false statement when she says "You will find no mass grave". At the time of writing, however, she was strictly correct because CONTRARY TO REPORTS AT THE TIME no mass grave had been found.

Now it has.

Your sneering at my "hypothesis" that "all these deaths and burials were legal and above board" implies that you think there must have been something illegal or criminal afoot? What crime or crimes specifically do you think were committed and where is the evidence for them?

Now let ME repeat what I have said before. By the standards it claims and given the strictures it places on its own flock and their treatment of deceased loved ones the church has behaved hypocritically, callously and arrogantly to these people. But none of that is criminal. Being a bollox is not against the law, (fortunately).

If people want to "bring perpetrators to justice" they first of all have to identify a crime. And then they have to determine who was responsible.

Now what crimes are you talking about?

Right, you may speculate that the deaths were legal and above board. My view is that whoever buried these kids are low lives of the highest order.

KKkitty

steddyeddy wrote: »

You know what KKKitty? People still judge single mothers. It hasn't gone away yet.

I had my first child in 2006. I was a single parent. My parents told me to come back home so I had someone there for me. My dad wasn't happy but he loved his grandson. I was the talk of the town for a while. Who was the father, was he going to be involved? I have to say though many who I thought that would think badly of me didn't. My mother's aunt was very religious but she was happy as long as I was too. To think that my mother was in the same situation but because it was decades previous, that she wasn't allowed to keep her baby and I was shows we've come a long way.

retro:electro

Let me tell you, this is no shock to those of us who live in Galway. It was always just about biding time to have it confirmed. My mother went to school with some of these women. They'd be in school one day, then gone and never spoken about for 6-9 months. There's be rumours going about detailing where they were, "Mary is pregnant so she's gone to a home", "I heard she had an baby boy"..
9 months later Mary would return to school with no baby and no mention of a baby, she'd tell people she "went to help an elderly aunt in England".
We've known about this for years here, but somehow Ireland was never able to have a conversation about what actually happened until now. It was always hidden under a cloak of secrecy.

So sad and I'm ashamed to be associated with this disgusting religion who murdererd and abused and covered it up and denied it for years.

please helpThank YOU

There is one Dublin radio station and radio presenter and the his listeners and he has radio shows all about unmarried women and the mob join in and the hate the say about poor women kids this is in 2017 most people would know who I am on about

Seth Brundle

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Is there any way to trace who the nuns were in the home? If only to provide witness testimony.

I can recall being in the CICA offices and discussing this very thing with them.

The religious orders (and more so with the nuns) had a habit of renaming their staff. At one point a convent could have coincidentally had a few Sr. Assumptas or whatever. Not for malicious reasons but in hindsight proved burdensome as it made tracking them down very difficult by all accounts.

Seth Brundle

pilly wrote: »

Why has it taken so long from the initial findings to now?

If you rush something then you make mistakes!

Seth Brundle

lawred2 wrote: »

If they couldn't sell them - they let them die

Now that's just being daft.
There's absolutely no evidence that anyone was murdered in Tuam so stop making stuff up!


Note: as much as I loathe the institution, I'd prefer a mature and honest debate.

neonsofa

steddyeddy wrote: »

You know what KKKitty? People still judge single mothers. It hasn't gone away yet.

People judge but the main judgement I hear is the usual assumption- "single mother claiming benefits and getting a free house" and I'd much prefer that people see the state giving support (even if they are misguided in their opinion that we are given excessive support) than how they treated us in the past.

Seth Brundle

steddyeddy wrote: »

Rest in peace poor unfortunates. You were murdered by degenerates and placed in a septic tank to be forgotten, but you'll be the ones remembered and the Garda, priests and bible thumpers will be forgotten.

As per my previous post, there's no evidence of murder here!

neonsofa

please helpThank YOU wrote: »

There is one Dublin radio station and radio presenter and the his listeners and he has radio shows all about unmarried women and the mob join in and the hate the say about poor women kids this is in 2017 most people would know who I am on about

Ah I listen to that show, if its who i think you're on about, they also give out about black people, taxi drivers, etc. It's not the best measure of society tbf.

Colser

kbannon wrote: »

As per my previous post, there's no evidence of murder here!

Do you believe that they were cared for in the best possible way that was available to their "carers" at the time?

Seth Brundle

Colser wrote: »

Do you believe that they were cared for in the best possible way that was available to their "carers" at the time?

I think they were neglected by so many different people and official bodies but I'm not going to assume murder.
I'll wait for an official statement of fact before joining a torch wielding mob.

lazybones32

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Have a ljsten back to today's Liveline listen to one of the callers who fell into one of them while playing as a child

Listen to her description

Of the three or four who replied to me (and 1 daw who pm'd) you're the one I've no problem with.

No, I don't need to listen to liveline. I read Corless' thing shortly after it emerged and the two guys testimony and that was enough for me. I haven't read much on it since the Garda investigation was announced (no point really) and I'll wait for their findings....would rather deal with facts than emotion.

steddyeddy

kbannon wrote: »

As per my previous post, there's no evidence of murder here!

A mass grave in a septic tank would give most people cause to think either foul play or child neglect/abuse. Let's hope you don't think burying babies in secret is normal.

lazybones32

kbannon wrote: »

Now that's just being daft.
There's absolutely no evidence that anyone was murdered in Tuam so stop making stuff up!


Note: as much as I loathe the institution, I'd prefer a mature and honest debate.

In AH?...on a bandwagon thread?! you must be out of your mind!

Seth Brundle

steddyeddy wrote: »

A mass grave in a septic tank would give most people cause to think either foul play or child neglect/abuse. Let's hope you don't think burying babies in secret is normal.

I'm well able to phrase things without requiring you to clarify. I never said it was normal and I did state that it was neglectful.
I'm just not going to adopt a Facebook set of emotions without any actual facts.
What I said was that there was no evidence of murder. I didn't say murder didn't happen but we currently have no knowledge of any nor is there, AFAIK, any allegations of murder apart from a few on here.

dav3

Snickers Man wrote: »

Terry Prone's letter, from its tone--

Prone was indeed spinning in that email, it’s quite obvious, similar to your attempts at spinning in this thread.
If you read the email again you’ll notice that she was ‘instructed’ by the Bon Secuors.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Now what crimes are you talking about?

I have absolutely no idea what you’re referring to. Do you perhaps have me confused with someone else?

Bones were found at a site in Tuam, the nuns with the aid of their PR company tried to cover up the discovery by claiming the bones were from the famine period and had nothing to do with them.
Today, and only today, new evidence has emerged that the bones did indeed belong to babies, the important part is that they were dated back to the period of when the mother and baby home was operational and not belonging to the famine period.

I think you’d agree that all involved in the cover up have some explaining to do. The discovery of bones in a mass grave cannot be simply shrugged off as having a simple explanation and left at that. Nothing is off the table at this stage. Which is exactly what should be expected when a mass grave is uncovered at any time.

neonsofa

steddyeddy wrote: »

A mass grave in a septic tank would give most people cause to think either foul play or child neglect/abuse. Let's hope you don't think burying babies in secret is normal.

Can I ask, I don't have a great knowledge of religion- especially in those times, but am I correct in thinking that "illegitimate" children, born out of wedlock, were not baptised and therefore not entitled to a traditional catholic burial? Not at all justifying it obviously just asking if this was the case. Obviously there are alternatives to the traditional burial that don't involve septic tanks.

lazybones32

dav3 wrote: »

It doesn't appear that your judgements are based on the truth.

The type of tank is now irrelevant. Whether it was a septic tank or not, it doesn't make the actions any less horrific.

The "truth" is below.

The Commission has not determined x2....what "truth" does that reveal that contradicts an iota of what I wrote? If anything, it confirms what I've been saying.

What were the horrific actions you speak of?

steddyeddy

kbannon wrote: »

I'm well able to phrase things without requiring you to clarify. I never said it was normal and I did state that it was neglectful.
I'm just not going to adopt a Facebook set of emotions without any actual facts.
What I said was that there was no evidence of murder. I didn't say murder didn't happen but we currently have no knowledge of any nor is there, AFAIK, any allegations of murder apart from a few on here.

If I buried my family in secret, in a septic tank you wouldn't suspect foul play?

steddyeddy

neonsofa wrote: »

Can I ask, I don't have a great knowledge of religion- especially in those times, but am I correct in thinking that "illegitimate" children, born out of wedlock, were not baptised and therefore not entitled to a traditional catholic burial? Not at all justifying it obviously just asking if this was the case. Obviously there are alternatives to the traditional burial that don't involve septic tanks.

Yes some were but a mass grave in a sceptic tank leads me to believe foul play.

Colser

lazybones32 wrote: »

The Commission has not determined x2....what "truth" does that reveal that contradicts an iota of what I wrote? If anything, it confirms what I've been saying.

What were the horrific actions you speak of?

Do you have any issue with the "burials" regardless of the cause of death?

neonsofa

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes some were but a mass grave in a sceptic tank leads me to believe foul play.

As in allowing deaths to happen? Or causing them? I can't get my head around it to be honest. It was such a different time and I'm trying to remember that but it's horrific; but then some people are so...almost indifferent to it that I'm just confused and trying to understand, can't articulate my feelings really.

Spanish Eyes

I have no words left for this abomination WRT to little children in the care of those who professed to be of the Catholic Church.

But is was not only in Tuam. Believe me. Many so called Magdalens (WOMEN) were buried in the Convent grounds also. In unmarked graves.

Highly likely that many of their babies suffered the same undignified burial in a sewer too.

Jesus this country was/is totally fecked.

But it was impossible to talk about it until relatively recently. To be fair.

Such command and control by the CC, the nuns, the convents, the Magdalens, the mother and baby homes, and all the rest of it.

FFS.

I really hope we have moved on.

But then there is Grace, god love her and her peers.

Ave Sodalis

The sad thing is, the demonisation of single mothers is still fizzling out. I was born in 1994, and my mother had to fight tooth and nail to keep me. Another young woman wasn't quite as strong willed as my mother at the same time lost her child and she still has a haunted look about her eyes. The best thing is, the people who my mother had to fight off, the people who managed to take the other woman's child... these people are the most dedicated "pro-life" people out there.

There's still a huge amount of stigma attached to being a single mother. People are surprised when they find out I have a university degree. They take it as a matter of course when I say I'm working in a shop, and you can see the eyebrows go up when I tell them it's to save for a masters. Take a look at the ample threads on single parents on Boards, they aren't very pleasant. So even though there's improvements, I wouldn't be one bit surprised to still find people who would be secretly delighted to see the mother/baby homes and forced adoption back, and single parent allowance cut entirely.

smurgen

lazybones32 wrote: »

In AH?...on a bandwagon thread?! you must be out of your mind!

Do you think 68% mortality rate that some homes had was acceptable or normal?i would put my life on it that some of those 800 bodies will show signs of trauma causing death.this story is now again plastered all over the international news papers. Someone should pay for this.

Neyite

neonsofa wrote: »

Can I ask, I don't have a great knowledge of religion- especially in those times, but am I correct in thinking that "illegitimate" children, born out of wedlock, were not baptised and therefore not entitled to a traditional catholic burial? Not at all justifying it obviously just asking if this was the case. Obviously there are alternatives to the traditional burial that don't involve septic tanks.

The church are pretty hot about baptising so it would be a priority to get a baby baptised as soon as possible after birth. Anyone (don't even have to be a Catholic) can baptise a baby in an emergency and it will be seen as valid in the eyes of the church. I was baptised minutes after birth. You are even permitted to baptise in utero if the holy water can actually land on the baby -for example, during a c-section. That's how keen the RCC with regard to the sacrament of baptism.

I highly doubt that the nuns would have looked after unbaptised children. These children would have had morning prayers, those that could, went to a local catholic school, said prayers there, would have prepared for first confession and first holy communion along with other classmates.

So there is a high chance that many buried there unless stillborn, would have a baptismal cert.

neonsofa

Neyite wrote: »

The church are pretty hot about baptising so it would be a priority to get a baby baptised as soon as possible after birth. Anyone (don't even have to be a Catholic) can baptise a baby in an emergency and it will be seen as valid in the eyes of the church. I was baptised minutes after birth. You are even permitted to baptise in utero if the holy water can actually land on the baby -for example, during a c-section. That's how keen the RCC with regard to the sacrament of baptism.

I highly doubt that the nuns would have looked after unbaptised children. These children would have had morning prayers, those that could, went to a local catholic school, said prayers there, would have prepared for first confession and first holy communion along with other classmates.

So there is a high chance that many buried there unless stillborn, would have a baptismal cert.

Oh, I thought they weren't allowed be baptised if born to unwed parents. Every day is a learning day. Thanks.

lazybones32

Colser wrote: »

Do you have any issue with the "burials" regardless of the cause of death?

Well, I wasn't there so I don't know how the burial was conducted, so all I can do (until facts emerge - if they ever do) is imagine how they were conducted...I doubt they were drop-kicked into the ground by money-counting-nuns....or maybe they were? It'd fit some peoples narrative that the nuns did this as a mark of contempt but there could be a much more pragmatic reason to it.

We have a few paupers and famine graves here: that poor people couldn't afford as elegant and respectful a ceremony as others doesn't offend or upset me in the least.

Snickers Man

dav3 wrote: »

Prone was indeed spinning in that email, it’s quite obvious, similar to your attempts at spinning in this thread.
If you read the email again you’ll notice that she was ‘instructed’ by the Bon Secuors.

I'm not spinning anything. I'm merely stating (and asking) for facts.

dav3 wrote: »

I have absolutely no idea what you’re referring to. Do you perhaps have me confused with someone else?

Now who's being facetious?

Here's what you said in a previous statement "Had all these deaths and ‘burials’ been legal and above board as you put in your hypothesis, it appears that these people went to extraordinary lengths to cover it up. The question would have to be asked why?"

Your are clearly implying here that illegality was committed. I'm merely asking what it was?

dav3 wrote: »

Bones were found at a site in Tuam, the nuns with the aid of their PR company tried to cover up the discovery by claiming the bones were from the famine period and had nothing to do with them.
Today, and only today, new evidence has emerged that the bones did indeed belong to babies, the important part is that they were dated back to the period of when the mother and baby home was operational and not belonging to the famine period.

:rolleyes:
It wasn't the discovery of bones that brought the number of deaths at the home to light; it was the researches of Ms Corless. Obviously, the bodies had to be somewhere, assuming they weren't, in their era, cremated. It's no surprise that they were found on the site of the home.

My only point was that the nugget which created the worldwide media frenzy was the "Bodies in a septic tank" hysteria. Which has now been disproved.

dav3 wrote: »

I think you’d agree that all involved in the cover up have some explaining to do. The discovery of bones in a mass grave cannot be simply shrugged off as having a simple explanation and left at that. Nothing is off the table at this stage. Which is exactly what should be expected when a mass grave is uncovered at any time.

There is a simple explanation, although some attempt at verification should be made by the investigators. These are the bodies of some or all of the people who died while at the home and whose deaths were notified to the authorities. As Ms Corless revealed.

4068ac1elhodqr

When you read this news, it sounds like it's not a million miles away from some sort of sick 'satanic child sacrifice' sci-fi novel.
Think even the ancient Aztecs did it all with a bit more dignity and respect, up to their sun god.

Know of a priest with a nice new Merc (and not your starter/lower executive type models, neither) and empty 20-bed property.
Isn't Greed still one of the 7 deadly sins?

smurgen

lazybones32 wrote: »

Well, I wasn't there so I don't know how the burial was conducted, so all I can do (until facts emerge - if they ever do) is imagine how they were conducted...I doubt they were drop-kicked into the ground by money-counting-nuns....or maybe they were? It'd fit some peoples narrative that the nuns did this as a mark of contempt but there could be a much more pragmatic reason to it.

We have a few paupers and famine graves here: that poor people couldn't afford as elegant and respectful a ceremony as others doesn't offend or upset me in the least.

You're trying to down play the findings in every way possible.famine graves?some of these graves are from the 1960's.very recent in my eyes.you clearly have an angle.what is your connection to the church?no one down plays something like this unless they have vested interests.

Seth Brundle

steddyeddy wrote: »

If I buried my family in secret, in a septic tank you wouldn't suspect foul play?

So what you're saying is that there's no difference between waiting on clarity on unexplained deaths and screaming "murder"?

juno10353

steddyeddy wrote:

a mass grave in a sceptic tank leads me to believe foul play.

Ms Corless investigated the fact that there were 793 death certificates issued by the state for the time period of the mother and baby home, yet there was no evidence of the children having been buried. This and local talk and knowledge led to this site being investigated. The site contains 2 sewage tanks. The bones of children havenow been found there. How many is yet unknown. Are all the dead children here in unmarked un consecrated ground or are there more sites. Could, as happened in other religous homes, some of the certificates have been faked and children sent abroad. There are so many unanswered questions and so many mothers and familys needing answers.

neonsofa

sup_dude wrote: »

The sad thing is, the demonisation of single mothers is still fizzling out. I was born in 1994, and my mother had to fight tooth and nail to keep me. Another young woman wasn't quite as strong willed as my mother at the same time lost her child and she still has a haunted look about her eyes. The best thing is, the people who my mother had to fight off, the people who managed to take the other woman's child... these people are the most dedicated "pro-life" people out there.

There's still a huge amount of stigma attached to being a single mother. People are surprised when they find out I have a university degree. They take it as a matter of course when I say I'm working in a shop, and you can see the eyebrows go up when I tell them it's to save for a masters. Take a look at the ample threads on single parents on Boards, they aren't very pleasant. So even though there's improvements, I wouldn't be one bit surprised to still find people who would be secretly delighted to see the mother/baby homes and forced adoption back, and single parent allowance cut entirely.

I dunno, it IS more difficult to get a degree if parenting alone. I did it myself and it was so hard to juggle childcare while working and attending college and then studying while at home, i didnt get a second. So I don't think the surprise is due to them thinking you're too big for your boots or anything, I think it is more a case of "oh fair play, didn't think you'd have the time/resources", because I get that too when I discuss my education and future ambitions. And in fairness i dont even kniw how i did it :pac: Or people being surprised to find out I'm in full time employment rather than on social welfare, it's not out of malice, more an acknowledgement that it is difficult to do these things as a single parent. Not that we deserve a pat on the back or anything for doing it, but it is more difficult cause you can't share the load. Not taking away from the judgement that still exists btw, but I don't think it is always negative judgement or assumptions. Sometimes people can just be giving you credit for what you did, and you should be proud

Neyite

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes some were but a mass grave in a sceptic tank leads me to believe foul play.

I wouldn't say foul play, but certainly neglect, poor nutrition or malnutrition in many cases would have ensured that the ordinary bugs and viruses that did the rounds hit them harder and often with fatal consequences.

Plus, if it was a home that arranged adoptions, then chances are the ones left behind were the ones that were not 'good' adoption candidates. Rich people who were able to bypass the adoption process by wafting money at the nuns would hardly take the kid with the club foot, or asthma over the cute healthy robust one. So the ones that remained could well have had neglected health issues that a life in an institution would have made worse.

So in regard to crime? The only ones I could think of is that there might be a breach of regulations for burial such as it must be in a box, in an approved burial location and to a certain depth. Or maybe a breach of environmental regulations, but I've no idea if they were even in place back then. Maybe someone with a legal background might have an idea on that.