Ireland's Child Care Institutions during the 20th. Century. Fo'T: The most vivid and passionate stories - banished babies, cruel orphanages, old abuses of power - have concerned things that went unnoticed, or at least unarticulated, at the time. News has often had to be redefined, not as the latest sensation but as that which everybody knew all along yet could not say.

Friday, September 09, 2005

Help For The Genuinely Confused Taxpaying Public

Reference: L.O.V.E. Letter

quote: In whose interest does Colm O'Gorman, director of One in Four launch, such a petty attack on the Let Our Voices Emerge charity (September5th)?
I think Florence here is objecting to the command of the English language which Colm displays - the "petty attack" is nothing of the sort, it is a serious question that is being asked here: Is the charity L.O.V.E witholding evidence of massive fraud by survivors of Irish religous orders managed Child Care Institutions ? This charity HAS stated publicly that it has evidence of false claims - my feeble command of the English language (compared to Colm's articulation) urges ME to ask LOVE: PUT UP or SHUT UP please.


quote: And in whose interest does he imply the redress board system is working well?

Colm can only draw conclusions from what is in the public domain, his conclusion, as to how well the RIRB is working here is not based on hearsay,prejudice, the Sound of Music or idyllic childhood memories.


quote: Certainly not in the interest of those of us from the institutions who have had to stand back and watch our carers (both religious and lay) as well as our fellow inmates fall foul of a compensation system that requires such a low level of proof that it isvirtually impossible to prove innocence.

What the charity LOVE hates to mention is the fact of our detention was ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The State had no right whatsover to detain the children of one particular class of children in Ireland. The State was wrong. It conspired with one religious denomination to target the children of one class of people and this conspiracy led to ALL the other abuses that WERE committed in the Institutions. How this can be classed by LOVE as "low level of proof" isdisingenuous, not straightforward, not being candid; insincere and calculating.


quote: I take issue with the statement: "There is no question of any individual being found guilty or responsible for an act of abuse and there is no question of a person's name being damaged publicly". The obvious question there would be, "Why, then, is compensation awarded, and why must a person be named?"

This isn't an obvious question to me and many other survivors of the Institutions, nevertheless it is asked. The simple answer is because it is the LAW, this is what is allowed by the Redress Act, isn't that so? If the LAW had been respected as to the constitutional rights of ALL people in Ireland from thefoundation from the State then the Redress Act would NEVER have come into being.


quote:Perhaps, not being from an institution, Mr O'Gorman may not be aware of the humiliation and frustration those accused (inmates accusing each other as well as carers) go through. Poor payment for the sacrifices the majority of them made for us.

As I am a former detainee of the Institutions may I restate that LOVE is being disingenuous here again, I know of no carer who made sacrifices for me, no carer stood in the way as I was being battered, no carer stood up for me as I was being humiliated, no carer took my place in any of the abuses I suffered. If I have in any way humiliated any of my abusers, or if any of my abusers have felt any frustration then may I say that the Redress Board has brought me closure and some kind of vindication. Thank you LOVE for passing on that snippet of information.


quote:The compensation system has already been proven flawed in Canada and Wales in that "the genuinely abused are seen as defrauding the state, the falsely accused are left with ruined lives, and the [ taxpaying] public left confused as regards to the extent abuse did or did not happen in the homes"(Kauffman/House of Commons report). To attempt to deny us the right to speak out is to deny those who did suffer abuse the right not to see defrauders using their real pain for financial gain.

You state here that the ""genuinely abused are seen as defrauding the state"" !! May I ask if LOVE is NOW publicly stating that people who HAVE been sexually and physically abused in the institutions in Ireland should NOT be compensated? That Institutional Abuse Victims are fraudsters? Are you NOW going to start a new organisation to help the "genuinely confused taxpaying public" ??


quote:If Mr O'Gorman is sufficiently experienced with the RIRB as to advocate it, he should be perfectly aware that it is formed in such a way as to make it impossible for us to take a criminal case against anyone making allegations.

There is an option here for LOVE ... PUT UP or SHUT UP.


quote:However, what we can and will be doing is fighting the redress system as the largest organised denial of a person's constitutional right to their good name, and one of the greatest (legalised) injustices our Government has ever perpetuated.

I completely disagree:> There were over 120,000 children incarcerated in the Institutions in Ireland, now THAT is the ""largest organised denial of a person's constitutional right"" and the ""greatest (legalised) injustices"" ever in Ireland.

Blog Archive