Adoption is the only trauma society expects its victims to be grateful for; an open letter

Tldr: please consider contacting your TDs about the proposed Mother and Baby redress scheme which excludes 40% of survivors.

Survivors excluded again: Widen the unfair Mother and Baby Homes redress scheme.

I write this post to share a bit of my story and reaction to the proposed Mother and Baby home redress scheme.

I am still waiting for my file from Tusla so the below info is what I know so far.

I was born in September 1982. The first few weeks of my life were spent at St. Patrick’s Mother and Baby Home on the Navan Road in Dublin. To say that I have not experienced mental anguish or trauma from the adoption is just insulting. To be denied from receiving recognition by being excluded from the redress scheme is hurtful and retraumatisimg. Once again adoptees are being told to get over themselves, that they have nothing to complain about, that they should be happy with getting lip service. To be told that having access to my information is fair redress is a slap in the face. I should have had access to my information years ago.

My biological mother was a young unmarried woman lacking sufficient support to raise a child so she was advised to go to this Mother and Baby Home and place her child for adoption. I don’t want to tell her story but I will say she suffered traumatic treatment during labour and in her time at the hospital and the Mother and Baby Home. When I was approximately 3 weeks old, she left the Mother and Baby Home to return to her family home in Donegal. She was informed that I was to be collected later that same day by my adoptive parents. I was placed with my adoptive parents 11 November 1982. They were informed that I had been under the care of my birth mother until hours before the placement. Clearly both parties had been lied to. Therefore I live with an approximately 3 week gap in my history. Where was I for that time? Why was the truth withheld from both my adoptive parents and my biological mother?

As a child I was often unhappy, anxious, nervous. I suffered from severe depression. Later in life mental health care professionals diagnosed me with an attachment disorder. Many experts believe the first few weeks of a person’s life can affect their ability to develop attachments. The mental health professionals I have talked to fully believe my issues started with my time in a Mother and Baby Home and my adoption. They are university educated psychologists and psychiatrists. This is not some fringe medicine theory.

In 2020 I was hospitalised with an unknown illness. I was near death due to severe anemia. I received multiple blood transfusions and luckily started to feel better. Then began the testing. I was interviewed by various doctors to try and figure out what had caused this. In the end I was diagnosed with a rare form of chronic leukemia, the cause for it is unknown. The missing 3 weeks of my life caused much anxiety during the days of the testing when I didn’t know what was wrong with me. I was unable to give a full medical history because there are just many things I don’t know. It has caused anxiety to me at many other points in my life.

I am fully aware that I am lucky. I wasn’t placed with an abusive adoptive family, I didn’t spend years in industrial schools or other care homes. There are many, many cases that are far worse than mine but that doesn’t mean my trauma isn’t real.

Survivors via the Oak Report and other means have made very clear they want everyone included in the scheme. Experts in early childhood development as well as human rights experts have agreed with this and published peer reviewed arguments for this. I have seen nothing to suggest this redress scheme is based on anything other than the flip of a coin, an arbitrary line of 6 months. If the minister could come up with any expert who could provide some argument for his reasoning, I would love to see it. If the minister could find any survivor or advocacy group that supports his proposal, I would love to see it. What evidence is he using to base his conclusions on? It appears there is none. It seems as if he believes his opinion on is more valid than that of those dedicated their academic life to these issues.

Another issue I would like to see raised and that I believe is often overlooked is the following. How can we have a fair discussion on redress when we still don’t have access to all of our information? As Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett stated in Dáil Eireann many of us are lacking information. He doesn’t know how long he was in a Mother and Baby Home. I don’t know where I was for 3 weeks. How can anyone decide if the proposed redress is fair when we still don’t know what happened to us?

I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

I urge everyone to contact their TDs about this issue.