Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I had made most of it, I think, but I was just flagging with the Minister that he had spoken with regard to his series of amendments, and I was drawing attention to Schedule 1, Part 2. There are three columns there: the reference number, the name of the institution, and the concluding year. I was talking about St. Kevin's Institution, initially the Dublin Union, and the concluding year was 1935. I was also making the point - and I never have a difficulty in telling my age - that I was born there in 1961. That is factually correct. I have also had dealings with more than 40 or 50 people who were born there in the 1960s.We know about this aspect from the historical context and the registers of a combination of a number of institutions. The Church of Ireland Representative Church Body, RCB, library in Churchtown has extensive records of its institutions because it has gathered many of them and many have been used in research. We know, however, that many people from St. Kevin's were sent out to other institutions in Dublin. We also know that people were only there for a day. We have been told and there are records showing that people entered there in the morning and were told they would have their babies, come hell or high water, by evening. Out they then went. The parents were then shipped back to the country. Many of these were secret birth procedures. There was a maternity facility in the institution, but not in the sense we might understand it. We are talking about the situation back then. This institution was also the Dublin Union and a tuberculosis, TB, hospital. It is now part of the St. James's Hospital complex.

I can understand, therefore, where there might be mix-ups and complexities regarding the different uses for different buildings on the same site. We do know, however, that a substantial number of children were born in the building I referred to. We also know many other children were there as well. For some reason, though, we know that many Anglican children were brought to this particular institution as well. It was not a religious place as such, and perhaps this was the reason. These children then went out to other institutions, some of them living in them up until the age of five and not being baptised. I was not baptised until I was five in St. Mark's Church here in Pearse Street in Dublin. I remember attending my own baptism. I have photographs of it, so it is quite an extraordinary story.

We must look back at the number of children born in this context. We will be able to get a clear picture of the very short stays these children had and where they then went. These children were transferred to mother-and-baby institutions. In some cases, the parents did not consent and the adoptions could not proceed for this reason. If the parents were particularly supported, they fought the case. Many of these children, therefore, grew up in the 1960s and 1970s in care and in limbo. Their parent or parents, because of forced separation, did not consent. The option then was for them to be raised in State institutions.

From the records of the State institutions, we know payments were made in the mid-to-late 1960s. There are extensive records of payments from the State into these institutions. Around the time of the Kennedy report, perhaps 1968 or around then, a significant amount of work was done in registering and getting a handle on all these children in these State places. I think this activity came from the recommendations of the Kennedy report. Suddenly, after that, we can see an extremely large amount of correspondence emanating from the Eastern Health Board, EHB, asking where these children were, what their health records were, including inoculations and whatever else, and why they were in State care. The EHB also wished to know if the parents of these children were contributing financially to their maintenance, and if not, why not. The question was also asked as to why these children were in limbo when their parents were not consenting and the process was being held up. Many children fell into this situation and then went on into State care.

I believe many records exist in this regard. It is arduous work to tease through the information. The Minister gave some reassurance, and I ask him to clarify this aspect, in respect of the possibility of an incorrect categorisation in this regard becoming known and a quick extension being given in such a case. Off the top of my head, I have referred to the only institution I know about. I am familiar as well, though, of course with Miss Carr's in Dublin. These were described as flatlets. Miss Carr's also had a place called No. 5 Northbrook Road, which is a completely different address. I visited both these premises yesterday. They are both still operating and in the business of caring for children today. This point is important.

Bethany House had other subsidiaries as well, so we have to be a little bit careful here. I ask the Minister to flag the case of St. Kevin's institution, if possible, and that this aspect be put on the radar now rather than later. I am not suggesting this should hold up the entire process. I think what the Minister is saying is that he is open to extending the concluding year if he feels it is warranted, justified and based on evidence he and his Department would be satisfied with.