
'Unfair' to make nuns contribute to mother and baby home redress scheme
Representatives for the Sisters of Mercy made the comments during a meeting with former children's minister Roderic O'Gorman on December 13, 2021, where it was claimed it would be "unfair" to make the nuns pay, as they were "just workers".
Following publication of the Commission of Investigation report into mother and baby homes, eight religious-run orders were asked by the Department of Children to contribute to the €800m redress scheme that was rolled out last year for survivors.
The Sisters of Mercy was one of five orders who refused to make any "voluntary" contribution.
Of the the three orders that made offers, the Bons Secours who ran the Tuam home, offered a contribution of €12.974,720, which was accepted by the Government.
Sisters of the Charity of Saint Vincent de Paul offered a building it owns that was already subject to an 'informal lease' by the Department of Education as its contribution. This was also accepted.
A third congregation, Saint John of God, offered to donate €75,000 to a charity that was not relevant to the scheme. The Government has rejected this offer.
New records released under Freedom of Information to the Irish Examiner show robust exchanges between the Sisters of Mercy and Mr O'Gorman, where the congregation defended its refusal to contribute to the redress scheme.
The nuns operated the county home in Kilrush in Co Clare, which was transformed from a workhouse in the early 1920s and staffed by the Sisters of Mercy on behalf of the County Clare Board of Health from 1922 to 1928.
The Commission of Investigation's report showed 180 children were born in the Kilrush home and 321 women were admitted, between 1922 and 1926.
In the minutes of the 2021 meeting, Mr O'Gorman was told by a spokesperson for the nuns it was 'unfair' to make them pay a contribution when they were only workers employed by the local council.
The sisters also provided staffing support at other mother and baby homes, including Stranorlar in Co Donegal, and were also employed at Cork County Home and District Hospital.
In the minutes of the 2021 meeting, Mr O'Gorman was told by a spokesperson for the nuns it was 'unfair' to make them pay a contribution when they were only workers employed by the local council.
A spokesperson said the congregation was involved in trying to 'make life better for these people, they are now being asked to contribute to this scheme'.
Their representative said: 'The State's historic failings send a chilling message in the present to those who work in frontline roles today in conditions that are challenging, in different ways, for those dependent on state services.'
The congregation also told the minister the 'county homes were owned, controlled, governed and supervised by the local authorities', who 'held the budgets, decided who was admitted and discharged and were responsible for the upkeep of the buildings'.
The nuns referred to the Commission of Inquiry's final report delivered in 2021 which found:
The matron in Stranorlar was a 'thorn in the side' of the local authority in her fight for improvements to that home;
Local authorities set the dietary arrangements in those homes and were noted to have intervened to reduce dietary provision;
The local authorities pursued maintenance charges from putative fathers;
The State structure was premised on unmarried mothers performing unpaid work in county homes in return for local authorities arranging the boarding-out of their children in foster families;
The commission's report evidences local authorities, in many cases, resisted policies that would have reduced the number of single parents' resident in county homes who were thus available to work unpaid;
The conditions in the county homes were appalling for all residents, including the sisters who worked in them.
The minister was also told 'no wrongdoing or failure had been identified in the commission's report on the part of any Sister of Mercy in connection with their employment or volunteering in county homes' and they 'should not now be misrepresented as having legal responsibility for the county homes'.
The minutes show Mr O'Gorman arguing the involvement of congregations in a number of county homes 'does create an element of responsibility in terms of the trauma and stigma suffered'.
However, the Sisters of Mercy responded by saying they 'have tried to help other women and now they were being impugned for providing this help'.
Mr O'Gorman said he accepted what the congregation said in relation to the difference between county homes and mother and baby homes, but both institutions were fully within the remit and scope of the commission's investigation.
He outlined how he was engaging with all the congregations that were involved with these institutions in any way and there had to be a collective response to what happened in the homes.
"This is the expectation of the public and survivors who faced emotional abuse and stigma in these institutions,' he said.
He told the order his predecessor Katherine Zappone had written to the pope during the Commission of Investigation process, and, the pope, in his response, had cited the responsibility of the State, the Church and the religious congregations.
However, the nuns insisted they were employees of the home and it has been repeated across the commission's final report of 2021 that the local councils were the governors.
The children's minister was also told 'no wrongdoing or failure had been identified in the commission's report on the part of any Sister of Mercy in connection with their employment or volunteering in county homes' and they 'should not now be misrepresented as having legal responsibility for the county homes'. Picture: Andy Newman
The minutes then show the nuns requested a five-minute recess, and when the meeting resumed, a representative repeated his previous question in respect of the exact failings by the Sisters of Mercy.
The meeting was told the Sisters of Mercy did not attend at the Commission of Investigation; there were no findings by the commission and their sole involvement was to produce records in relation to Kilrush.
The Sisters of Mercy again reminded the minister they did not 'own or govern any mother and baby home in the State, and that there is neither legal, moral nor ethical justification for the State's request that we make a financial contribution'.
They also requested that the minister for children:
Inform the public about the State's exclusive responsibility for county homes;
That any attempt at deflection of this responsibility towards those who worked in the institutions would be a profound departure from the principles of justice and fairness that all our citizens, including public servants today, and including the Mercy women, are entitled to expect;
That all those involved in county homes, whether as resident or employee, both living and deceased, would be treated with an equal sense of fairness and justice;
By making this request of their congregation, the State will create a misunderstanding in the public mind as to the nature of the sisters' role in county homes.
The eight religious orders had originally been asked to make a "voluntary" contribution to the redress scheme.
Earlier this year, external negotiator Sheila Nunan submitted her report showing the majority were refusing to make any contribution, despite having more than €1bn in assets.
Education minister Norma Foley has since written to those orders to state her disappointment and has asked all to "reflect" on their decisions.
She has begun consultations with the Attorney General on how to force religious orders who refuse to contribute to the redress scheme to do so.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Irish Examiner
2 days ago
- Irish Examiner
'Unfair' to make nuns contribute to mother and baby home redress scheme
A religious order has said being asked to contribute to the State's mother and baby home redress scheme is 'akin to asking a frontline worker in 50 years' time to be held accountable for the failures of the current HSE', new records show. Representatives for the Sisters of Mercy made the comments during a meeting with former children's minister Roderic O'Gorman on December 13, 2021, where it was claimed it would be "unfair" to make the nuns pay, as they were "just workers". Following publication of the Commission of Investigation report into mother and baby homes, eight religious-run orders were asked by the Department of Children to contribute to the €800m redress scheme that was rolled out last year for survivors. The Sisters of Mercy was one of five orders who refused to make any "voluntary" contribution. Of the the three orders that made offers, the Bons Secours who ran the Tuam home, offered a contribution of €12.974,720, which was accepted by the Government. Sisters of the Charity of Saint Vincent de Paul offered a building it owns that was already subject to an 'informal lease' by the Department of Education as its contribution. This was also accepted. A third congregation, Saint John of God, offered to donate €75,000 to a charity that was not relevant to the scheme. The Government has rejected this offer. New records released under Freedom of Information to the Irish Examiner show robust exchanges between the Sisters of Mercy and Mr O'Gorman, where the congregation defended its refusal to contribute to the redress scheme. The nuns operated the county home in Kilrush in Co Clare, which was transformed from a workhouse in the early 1920s and staffed by the Sisters of Mercy on behalf of the County Clare Board of Health from 1922 to 1928. The Commission of Investigation's report showed 180 children were born in the Kilrush home and 321 women were admitted, between 1922 and 1926. In the minutes of the 2021 meeting, Mr O'Gorman was told by a spokesperson for the nuns it was 'unfair' to make them pay a contribution when they were only workers employed by the local council. The sisters also provided staffing support at other mother and baby homes, including Stranorlar in Co Donegal, and were also employed at Cork County Home and District Hospital. In the minutes of the 2021 meeting, Mr O'Gorman was told by a spokesperson for the nuns it was 'unfair' to make them pay a contribution when they were only workers employed by the local council. A spokesperson said the congregation was involved in trying to 'make life better for these people, they are now being asked to contribute to this scheme'. Their representative said: 'The State's historic failings send a chilling message in the present to those who work in frontline roles today in conditions that are challenging, in different ways, for those dependent on state services.' The congregation also told the minister the 'county homes were owned, controlled, governed and supervised by the local authorities', who 'held the budgets, decided who was admitted and discharged and were responsible for the upkeep of the buildings'. The nuns referred to the Commission of Inquiry's final report delivered in 2021 which found: The matron in Stranorlar was a 'thorn in the side' of the local authority in her fight for improvements to that home; Local authorities set the dietary arrangements in those homes and were noted to have intervened to reduce dietary provision; The local authorities pursued maintenance charges from putative fathers; The State structure was premised on unmarried mothers performing unpaid work in county homes in return for local authorities arranging the boarding-out of their children in foster families; The commission's report evidences local authorities, in many cases, resisted policies that would have reduced the number of single parents' resident in county homes who were thus available to work unpaid; The conditions in the county homes were appalling for all residents, including the sisters who worked in them. The minister was also told 'no wrongdoing or failure had been identified in the commission's report on the part of any Sister of Mercy in connection with their employment or volunteering in county homes' and they 'should not now be misrepresented as having legal responsibility for the county homes'. The minutes show Mr O'Gorman arguing the involvement of congregations in a number of county homes 'does create an element of responsibility in terms of the trauma and stigma suffered'. However, the Sisters of Mercy responded by saying they 'have tried to help other women and now they were being impugned for providing this help'. Mr O'Gorman said he accepted what the congregation said in relation to the difference between county homes and mother and baby homes, but both institutions were fully within the remit and scope of the commission's investigation. He outlined how he was engaging with all the congregations that were involved with these institutions in any way and there had to be a collective response to what happened in the homes. "This is the expectation of the public and survivors who faced emotional abuse and stigma in these institutions,' he said. He told the order his predecessor Katherine Zappone had written to the pope during the Commission of Investigation process, and, the pope, in his response, had cited the responsibility of the State, the Church and the religious congregations. However, the nuns insisted they were employees of the home and it has been repeated across the commission's final report of 2021 that the local councils were the governors. The children's minister was also told 'no wrongdoing or failure had been identified in the commission's report on the part of any Sister of Mercy in connection with their employment or volunteering in county homes' and they 'should not now be misrepresented as having legal responsibility for the county homes'. Picture: Andy Newman The minutes then show the nuns requested a five-minute recess, and when the meeting resumed, a representative repeated his previous question in respect of the exact failings by the Sisters of Mercy. The meeting was told the Sisters of Mercy did not attend at the Commission of Investigation; there were no findings by the commission and their sole involvement was to produce records in relation to Kilrush. The Sisters of Mercy again reminded the minister they did not 'own or govern any mother and baby home in the State, and that there is neither legal, moral nor ethical justification for the State's request that we make a financial contribution'. They also requested that the minister for children: Inform the public about the State's exclusive responsibility for county homes; That any attempt at deflection of this responsibility towards those who worked in the institutions would be a profound departure from the principles of justice and fairness that all our citizens, including public servants today, and including the Mercy women, are entitled to expect; That all those involved in county homes, whether as resident or employee, both living and deceased, would be treated with an equal sense of fairness and justice; By making this request of their congregation, the State will create a misunderstanding in the public mind as to the nature of the sisters' role in county homes. The eight religious orders had originally been asked to make a "voluntary" contribution to the redress scheme. Earlier this year, external negotiator Sheila Nunan submitted her report showing the majority were refusing to make any contribution, despite having more than €1bn in assets. Education minister Norma Foley has since written to those orders to state her disappointment and has asked all to "reflect" on their decisions. She has begun consultations with the Attorney General on how to force religious orders who refuse to contribute to the redress scheme to do so.


Irish Daily Mirror
4 days ago
- Irish Daily Mirror
Mum of late Harvey Morrison signs petition calling on Simon Harris to resign
The mum of the late Harvey Morrison Sherratt - a nine-year-old boy who spent years awaiting scoliosis surgery before his death - has signed an online petition calling on former Health Minister Simon Harris to resign. The petition on calling for An Tanaiste Simon Harris' resignation has so far garnered nearly 10,000 signatures so far since it was launched on Tuesday. In a post on X, Gillian Sherratt stated: 'I've just signed this petition calling on Simon Harris to resign as a start to getting #JusticeForHarvey.' Tanaiste Simon Harris is facing calls to resign Ms Sherratt then encouraged her followers to 'please sign and share and show them we will no longer stand for our children being failed by the State.' The petition, which is addressed to Mr Harris entitled 'Simon Harris Resignation', explains how Harvey spent years waiting on scoliosis surgery before his death. Harvey died on July 29 after a short illness and years of pain during which he struggled to breath. Scoliosis patient Harvey Sherratt with his father Stephen Morrison Harvey, from Clondalkin, suffered from severe scoliosis but was forced to wait seven years for surgery. In 2017, while serving as Minister for Health, Mr Harris pledged that no child in Ireland would wait more than four months for scoliosis treatment. Last August, Harvey's mother, Gillian Sherratt, learned that her son had been removed from Children's Health Ireland's active scoliosis surgery waiting list — without the family's knowledge. Harvey eventually underwent surgery in December 2024, but by then the severe progression of his spinal curve meant it could no longer be fully corrected. At the end of July, Harvey's heartbroken parents Gillian and Stephen announced Harvey's death saying 'our little rockstar Harvey passed away in the arms of mum and dad.' 'In his short life Harvey faced more challenges than most, and was the bravest, strongest and most courageous boy. To know him was to love him, and he definitely left his mark on this world.' Both Gillian and Stephen have been calling for the resignation of Mr Harris since Harvey's death. The petition continues: 'Our health service is failing. We also need investment in hospital services and decent pay for those working within them, this includes nurses (who are the foots soldiers of the HSE and we should do all we can to retain the Irish talent and not export it, as it stands nurses can't afford to pay rent, food and travel to and from work on what they are paid, we should give them a salary that would ensure they want to stay, work and live here in Ireland). 'Simon Harris needs to go. He has no interest in any of the above. If he won't listen he should go and not get a pension for all of his failures.," the petition continues. The petition gives eight reasons as to why Mr Harris should resign including the hospital trolley crisis, near one million people on waiting lists to see consultants; cervical smear scandals; Children's Hospital overspend and Fine Gael increasing VAT on health supplements will only make more people ill.' In February 2024, a heartbreaking video of Harvey struggling to breathe due to the curve on his spine was widely shared on social media. And his case was highlighted in the Dail as hundreds of children remain on HSE waiting lists for vital scoliosis surgery. Harvey's parents also highlighted on X that 'On September 18 Simon Harris promised to meet with myself and Stephen to discuss Harvey's lack of care. 10 months on and that meeting never happened and now Harvey is gone. Harvey's father Stephen Morrison wrote: 'For years I have been saying what will it take for an investigation into [Children's Health Ireland] 'The death of another child.' Never in a million years did I think it would be Harvey.' 'Harvey was definitely unique,' his father added. 'But what isn't unique is the way he and other children and people with disabilities are being failed. It is up to us to stop it.' An Tanaiste Simon Harris's Department of Foreign Affairs has been asked for a comment. Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest news from the Irish Mirror direct to your inbox: Sign up here.


Irish Times
05-08-2025
- Irish Times
‘Just be in the present moment': the tyranny of western McMindfulness
Sometimes, the present moment is precisely what we need. Sometimes, it is unbearable. The present moment is not a benign psychological state of calm and tranquillity; it is to be approached with caution because it is potent with possibility and the potential to unravel our cobbled-together lives. 'Just be in the present moment,' we might say to the overstretched parent, the struggling adolescent, the commuter getting home in the dark or the junior doctor 11 hours into another Friday night working in A&E. Often this is a heartfelt and well-intended response to witnessing our fellow humans in distress; an expression of a genuine desire to offer comfort and support. However, this is not always the wisest response; it ignores what we know about the human mind, obscures the structural issues that underpin much human distress and runs the risk of victim blaming. READ MORE Like every generation before us, when faced with the inevitable challenges of being human, we seek simple solutions to complex problems. We turn to our contemporary healers seeking a balm or a quick fix for the troubled heart and mind and the exhausted body. And now, more than ever, we place our hope, perhaps too readily, in the promise of the present moment, overestimating its power and mistaking it for a cure. These minds of ours seem to have minds of their own sometimes. Racing ahead, spiralling back, caught in loops or worry and scenes we never meant to replay. There is little doubt that the human mind needs to be rescued from the rollercoaster of worry and rumination, the cycle of graphic catastrophisation we are all gripped by from time to time. However, the imperative to simply 'be in the present moment' is often a well-meant but naive response that fails to grasp the complexity of the human mind. The 'just be in the present moment' cultural obsession has taken firm root over the past two decades, emerging in part from the oversimplification of mindfulness meditation. This trend has been described as 'McMindfulness': a westernised, reductive, fast-food version of Eastern meditation practices, stripped of their ethical and moral foundations. [ Anyone else had their fill of mindfulness? Opens in new window ] Experienced meditators might smile at the naive expectation that one could inhabit the present at will or, indeed, remain there for prolonged periods of time. Or that 'being in the present moment' is a straightforward choice; like flipping a switch and we're suddenly in the arms of the present moment, luxuriating in contentment and calm. Worryingly, the present-moment obsession locates the source of distress firmly within the individual, overlooking the structural and systemic conditions that underlie so much human distress. In so doing, the concept of 'the present moment' is co-opted to serve an increasingly individualistic and meritocratic social narrative. The current obsession with the present moment also plays into the lucrative wellness culture we find ourselves immersed in. A wellness culture that also seeks to exist in the absence of meaningful social critique. This culture places an unsustainable burden on individual bodies and minds, demanding self-optimisation without addressing the broader conditions that cause distress. In such a culture underpinned by insatiable individualism, we find ourselves stumbling towards a new kind of exhaustion, present-moment burn out. Sometimes, the present moment is simply too much to bear. Sometimes, it's too painful. Sometimes it's overwhelming. And fundamentally, that is not a failure of will; it is simply not how the human brain works. Advances in neuroscience tell us the brain does not behave like a machine, responding to commands, and switching gears on command. It is the product of millenniums of evolution, shaped to anticipate, remember and protect. It does not yield easily to commands such as 'just relax', 'don't be worrying' or 'be in the present moment'. Our brains are primed for vigilance, to detect threats, escape danger and act fast, not linger and reflect. This immediacy and reactivity once gave our ancestors a survival advantage in a threat-ridden world. It's a 'better safe than sorry' brain in the main; reflection weighing the pros and cons comes later; survival comes first. The human brain's ability to psychologically avoid and deny the present moment is a highly evolved way of protecting ourselves from being overwhelmed. At times it might be the only option, even the wisest one, when life's harshness is unrelenting, when the forces of social and economic deprivation offer no reprieve, and when the lottery of life seems incessantly cruel. [ Has mindfulness become just another wing of capitalism? Opens in new window ] 'Just be in the present moment' can be a brutal ask that risks exposing the human heart and soul to more than they can bear. In the face of adversity, temporary emotional avoidance may be precisely what's called for. Denial, so often maligned by present-moment enthusiasts, can in fact be our ally. It can serve as an adaptive, protective and even compassionate reflex in the face of the cruelty we can encounter as we make our way through this life. The danger lies in becoming trapped in a pattern of denial: the psychological toll involved in persistent denial is considerable. A little denial can go a long way, but we get into trouble when avoidance becomes a way of life. A life lived in a continual state of denial and avoidance will blunt all of life; we risk living a life that feels hollowed out, flattened. In the present moment we are invited to bow to our smallness and insignificance, where we recognise our place in the vast web of existence, our place in the 'family of things' as the poet Mary Oliver described it. The immensity of the universe is laid bare when the present moment is encountered; this immensity slowly and softly reveals itself to us, offering an invitation to breathe deeply and live more wholeheartedly. In the presence of this moment, our interconnectedness is felt viscerally again, as if for the first time. The present moment pulls the rug from beneath us, uproots us from an anaesthetised individualism and reawakens us to the sharpness and subtlety of our shared humanity. Our long-standing ill-at-ease, out-of-sorts hen on a hot griddle eventually gives way to a bewildering vastness: sparkling with marvellousness and insignificance, tipsy on the freedom of it all. Our current cultural obsession with the present moment often obscures its radical potential, attempting to neutralise its potency. The present moment does not exist in an abeyance of our past or our imagined future. The present moment is never cut off from our past or imagined future; it is carried on the wings of memory and anticipation, rooted in what has been and lifted by what might be. The present moment, nestled quietly here, is not a refuge of sameness or shallow calm. It is the threshold where the familiar comforts of predictability begin to loosen, making space for the life that has been quietly waiting for us all along. Dr Paul D'Alton is associate professor at the school of psychology, UCD