A woman who claims she was forced to give up her child for adoption as an unmarried mother in a mother and baby home has settled her High Court action.
Conor Power SC, appearing for the woman and instructed by McGuigan Solicitors, told the High Court on Thursday that the woman who is now a pensioner is “a very vulnerable individual”. Counsel told Mr Justice Paul Coffey the court had given the sides time and the case had been resolved after mediation.
The woman, whose child was allegedly given up for adoption in 1980, was not in the High Court as the settlement of her case was announced.
The case is believed to be the first of several similar actions expected before the courts.
READ MORE
Sources have indicated there are a number of cases in the pipeline relating to alleged forced or alleged illegal adoption and relating to events in the 1980s, and as far back as the 1940s.
In this case, the woman had brought proceedings against her former employer which is a financial institution, the State, the HSE, Tusla, a nominee for a religious order which ran the mother and baby home, and the Adoption Authority of Ireland. Full defences had been filed, and all claims were denied by all parties.
Mr Power told the court the case could be struck out against all defendants, with costs against the financial institution and the religious order which ran the mother and baby home.
In the proceedings, it was claimed the alleged removal of the baby from the woman in 1980 had lifelong adverse effects on her, and she allegedly suffers from complex post-traumatic stress disorder.
The woman claimed the taking of her baby, allegedly against her will, was a source of anguish and great sadness and she found the whole experience frightening and heartbreaking.
The State parties were the Ministers for Justice and Children, Ireland (the State), and the Attorney General, along with the statutory bodies, the HSE, Tusla and the Adoption Authority of Ireland.
Against those parties it was claimed the religious order which ran the mother and baby home had been allowed to allegedly control and organise a system of forced adoption for unmarried mothers and there was an alleged failure to safeguard the woman’s constitutional rights.
It was also claimed that the woman had an unplanned pregnancy in 1980.
It was alleged the financial institution had a position of dominion and control over the woman, given that she was vulnerable because she had an unplanned pregnancy while single at a time when this carried a negative stigma.
It was further claimed a manager at the financial institution allegedly told the woman her child would have to be given up for adoption and it was contended she was given no choice in the matter.
After she gave birth to her child,she didn’t want to surrender her baby and refused to leave the hospital. She was grievously upset and wounded by the removal of her baby and it was claimed she was unaware of her rights.
It was further contended, while she signed a certificate of surrender, the purported surrender of her child was allegedly compelled on an involuntary basis, without true and informed consent and she had no legal advice.
It was further alleged against the financial institution that there was a failure to protect her from repeated upsetting comments and behaviour.
All of the claims were denied by all defendants.
