Speech in support of the Report of the Senate Inquiry into Former Forced Adoption Policies and Practices
It is a privilege to be able to contribute to this debate, and I sincerely congratulate everyone who have been involved in this disturbing Senate Inquiry.
I recently became aware of the expression “Baby Scoop Era” as a way of describing the period – post WW2 and onto the 1970s, tens of thousands of single women were coerced into giving up their babies for adoption, here in Australia, in Canada, America and the UK. It’s quite a visually challenging expression, isn’t it – capturing the wrenching of a child from its mothers’ arms?
I’ve read many of the stories documented, and many others are known personally to me. I vividly recall a young woman where I grew up being sent to Brisbane – leaving town as a vibrant, alive young girl, and returning 6 months later distressed, depressed – and not long after attempting to take her own life.
Girls from an orphanage attended my school – and I remember the discussion when one of the girls didn’t come back in 5th form, after the holidays- and the stories of what had happened to her – told with fear and trepidation by her friends. And not long ago, at a school reunion, this issue was raised again – as three former classmates revealed something to me of the experiences within their families of forced adoption.
The Inquiry has received horrible testimony of young women being drugged, physically restrained, and even told by authorities that their babies had died. The callousness is gut-wrenching! The personal accounts of those involved in the practices revealed on the 4 Corners program this week attest to the courage of the women able to tell their story to the world, on behalf of the many others who could not. I congratulate them all for their grace and their courage.
Dr Meryl Moor, gave her 2005 PhD thesis on this subject, the title: Silent Violence Australia’s White Stolen Children.
She quoted Jigsaw, in Brisbane:
In relation to adoption, the question needs to be asked: In what other period of human history did young mothers willingly defy nature and give away their babies en masse to strangers?”
It is an unspeakable act of cruelty. Dr Moor drew on the evidence of witnesses to the 2000 NSW Parliamentary Inquiry into Adoption Practices – where many similar stories were told – of threats made, promises given, the sense of powerlessness, the ensuing heartache.
When we speak of forced adoption we are talking about culturally imposed practices– and these are very different from personal, tough decisions to have a child adopted. When a dominant culture imposes its values onto a minority group, this is an abuse of human rights.
Already since the election of the Labor Government in 2007 we have had acts of injustices recognised – the apology to the stolen generations was a potent moment of healing in the Australian psyche. The apology to the forgotten Australians, children raised in institutional care – has helped to ease the pain and hurt of lost childhoods and identity. And today, we are giving hope to the thousands of young women, and in many cases, their partners, who were forced to relinquish their babies, that there can be some redress, some formal acknowledgement of their hurt and pain, some sense that governments, churches and communities were wrong.
We all know that many of those involved in removing Aboriginal children from their homes did so in the belief that it was for the greater good, and no doubt the same applies to many who thought adoption into a two-parent family was automatically a more desirable outcome to life with an unmarried mother. But the fact that a practice was followed in good faith does not necessarily make it right.
Again, the 4 Corners program showed how much this weighed on the minds of social workers, hospital staff, and, I am sure, many of the adoptive parents.
Way back in 1492, you’ll recall, Columbus sailed the ocean blue. One of the first things he did when he got to America was to take (well, basically kidnap) a native American child. He later adopted him, and had him baptised (called him Diego) —in order, he said, to save his immortal soul.
It may have suited Christopher Columbus very well to have a local translator whom he could control, but I’m also prepared to believe that he genuinely thought young Diego would be better off with him than with his own family. However, the sincerity of his belief does not justify his actions.
And the forced removal of babies in Australia may have been seen by many then as an act of kindness, intended to save these children from harmful environments—but as in the case of Columbus, that’s simply not good enough. What we have in this Senate report is nothing less than a catalogue of human rights violations.
Violations of the rights of mothers such as the wonderful, outspoken Christine Cole, whose experience as a 16 year old, inspired her to research the issue of forced adoptions. Her interviews with other young mothers and with medical workers formed the backbone of her doctoral thesis on the subject.
She described in graphic detail the procedure when a single mother was obliged to visit a social worker: her file was marked, without her knowledge or consent, to indicate that the unborn baby was available for adoption, and later, at the birth, staff in the maternity ward acted according to the note on the file and the baby was removed.
It is difficult to convey to people now living in a society that values and enforces an individual’s civil and human rights, what life was like 40-60 years ago for a vulnerable young woman who lacked knowledge, support and resources – and frankly, even for those who did!
Girls were not instructed about pregnancy, labour and delivery; Pregnant girls were hidden away, or sent away, to the eternal shame of their families.
They were isolated from their families and from other new mothers; they were not provided information about welfare or about how they might be able to support their child. Of course, until the 1970s when child support payments were extended to unmarried mothers – they had little ability to support themselves- few options to consider, no sense of personal agency, few choices.
In short, they were not recognised as legitimate mothers, and when their babies were forcibly removed nor were they recognised as legitimate mourners.
The work of psychologists such as John Bowlby and Elizabeth Kubler Ross has taught us a lot about love, loss and grief, and the pages of this Report bring the psychological theories vividly to life. But it is not only the mothers whose human rights were violated: so were the rights of countless children who were denied access to their natural heritage.
No matter how much they were loved by their adoptive parents, for many, tracing their roots has become an arduous and painful process of discovery. It sounds self evident to us today, that the best place for a child is with her own family and community; the best place for a mother is with her child, and if she cannot care for her properly she should be supported in every way to make informed, thoughtful decisions regarding alternative care – but for these women, and at this time – it isn’t what happened.
I would use the word “ill –conceived” to describe not the babies, but the practice of forced adoption.
Ill-conceived, because of the absence of integrity and respect. These values are fundamental to how society should work.
Integrity—in being forthright, accurate and honest with all parties involved in its decisions.
Respect—in recognising each person’s right to autonomous decision-making, or what some people call “the ethic of self-determination”.
Adoption is a life-long process, not a one-time event. When engaging in such a process the innate dignity of human beings—and this of course includes children—must be considered.
Columbus may not have realised this, but we do. The Report makes it abundantly clear that human dignity was not a consideration in the case of these young women and their babies. The dominant themes are of raw emotions – betrayal, humiliation, condemnation, abandonment, trickery, grief, and of course – abject loss.
The Report brings great heartbreak into the light from the shadows of the past—the not too distant past—and although, as Senator Siewert has said, this makes harrowing reading, it is always a good thing when the truth is revealed, even when this truth is what psychiatrist Geoff Rickarby has rightly described as “a stain on our history”.
I am glad that the churches have recognised this, and I add my voice to the recommendations of this report.
Nothing can heal the experience of love and loss of these women, who carry that with them everyday. But, I sincerely hope that through this report and the recommendations we can help remove their sense of shame and restore their dignity and self worth.
My favourite poet Leonard Cohen would surely say of this report:
Nothing is perfect, there is a crack in everything, that’s how the light gets in.
I hope the light shines brightly for you all.
Dear Ursula,
Thank you for your warm, passionate and understanding comments about the issue of past-adoption practices.
I relinquished my baby daughter to adoption in 1972 and have never really got over the grief of it, despite the fact that I have a loving and understanding husband and two daughters by my marriage.
In 1982 I gave birth to a stillborn baby (also a girl) and, although it was a traumatic experience it was not nearly as dreadful as the experience of relinquishing. In the case of my baby’s death I was seen (as you say) as a legitimate mother, allowed to express grief; people, including my parents, gathered around to support me.
I am so grateful for the fact that these practices have come to light and that an apology may be made. I wasn’t forced to give up my baby but I was certainly coerced. I was never informed about the 30 day ‘cooling off’ period.
Thank you for your words.
Helen
Five years ago my sister came looking for me. My birth mother had given me up for adoption at Crown Street Women’s Hospital in 1956. Two years before her death my sister had tried to get her to talk about it but she remained tight lipped. The saddest thing is that she seemed to have locked that part of her life away. I have read loads of information to understand why she did this but not until I read about the Senate enquiry and saw 4Corners this week into forced adoptions that it started to make sense to me. My reunion with family members has been a wonderful journey. I have sent for and received as much paperwork about my birth but became extremely angry when my birth records show “drugs given to mother in previous 12 hours (sedatives, oxytocics) has been blacked out. I rang the records dept. only to be told “that information was about my mother, not me). In 2012 it’s still being covered up. I’m ecstatic that finally the can of worms has been opened. Thank you Ursula, I know your journey into forced adoption still has a long way to go.
No words can ever express the horror of my experience in 1964 when my first born daughter was taken from my body, wrapped, and placed in the arms of a woman who scurried from the room in which I had given birth at a major Melbourne hospital. Drugged, my scream was not piercing the universe, but was quiet. My arms, in an imagined stretched to the door the woman scurried thru, lay limp beside my body. I was severley drugged and unable to move.
There are now words that details experiences such as mine and they are now very public, thanks to the Senate Enquiry. These words tell what happened to myself and the many other women who found themselves in a similar situation. Women like myself, who fell into the hands of the system geared to routinely steal our babies for adoption. By 1964, I now realise, the system had become established. The original aim of the nuns, of providing shelter to unmarried mothers had metamorphed into babies being removed, immediately after birth from women who were unable to hold their child. These acts provided a solution to the rapidly increasing demand for babies for adoption and the application of cultural norms by the nursing and medical professions. I hold them accountable for their actions.
I hasten to add, I educated at a Catholic convent, and was a devout catholic attending university. My faith crumbled as my daughter was taken from me. I had been betrayed.
My wounds will accompany me to my grave.
My plea is that Adoption Legislation be removed from the statutes and adoption orders become an order similar to permanent parenting order and made by the Family Law Court of Australia in the best interests of the child. This is my plea because birthing identities are still being altered by law, and current adoptive parents have no authorities to insist that it is in the interests of a child to have their natural parents in their lives in whatever way possible.
I am an adoptee taken from my mother in 1962. I too was in the gallery when the handing down of the report unfolded. I cried through the whole thing as I finally heard our leaders speak the truth of our life. I was not given into a happy home, infact the abuse I endured as a child is a life straight from a Charles Dickens novel. My childhood was a living hell and one few can comprehend to fathom as to why my adoptive parents bothered to adopt and even more startling is how they managed to pass themselves off as people capable of adopting. I was forced into child slave labor at the age of five, I had already been exposed to abuse but as each year I grew older the abuse became worse. I have been beaten, suffocted, kicked with heavy work boots, and even set alight. There are parts of my abuse that is deemed as torture, which I still find very hard to speak of. Adoptees like me are only now finding their voice as our adoptive parents die or reach such an age as to not be a threat to us anymore. I believe that this inquiry only heard a small portion of the abusive lives many adoptees have had to live. I would hope that there will be greater dialoge with adoptees and our countries leaders in an endeavour to see us have a greater voice and services required so we can pursue happier, healther lives. As excited as I was about the report I was saddened to see that there was no avenue for adoptees to be represented along side the mothers. I hope that this changes as it is urgently needed. I now run a support and lobby group for abused and mistreated adoptees due to coming to terms with my horrific past I became acutely aware of the huge lack of understanding, help, and assistance, from mental health proffessional, doctors, social workers etc and expecially from our members of parliment as to what we have endured and what is needed to help us cope. Chapter 4 of the report is only a snipet of our lives and I ask that all members of parliment open their doors, their hearts, minds and souls to move heaven and earth to see that we are given the services we all so desperately need.Adoptees require a platform to speak from and not one behind the mothers but beside them. I thank you for your support and look forward to the day adoptees can finally feel free from the chains of adoption.
i wish to personally thank you for your words of support for us mothers. We have worked hard and waited long for our history to be recognized and acknowledged. This has taken an immense toll on our mental health and well-being. When the senate report came down on the 29th February 2012 i was in the gallery to hear the words spoken that would make that day one of the most wonderful days of my life. At last validation of our abuse. No insensitive equivocal words were used just the truth. I have been on a roller coaster of emotions ever since then and am still finding it difficult to believe i have finally been heard, understood and believed.
I have not seen my beautiful son for more than 50 years he believes i “gave him away willingly” and does not want contact with me, the hardest thing for me to bear is the fact that i didn’t “give him away” but can never let him know this. Now maybe he will know through words such as yours that i loved him desperately
June Smith
5 Fitzroy Court, Alexandra Vic 3714
Recently I sat in Gosford Library to read extracts from the Senate Inquiry and I was overcome with emotion as I read the many case studies. In my own family there have been 4 adoptions so I have witnessed the repercussions. They were not necessarily forced adoptions but the heartbreak is much the same. At present I am trying to obtain the name of my second cousin’s grandfather. Through research I was able to tell him of his mother’s adoption only last year. He is seventy years old and requires this information. His mother was born in 1918 but his grandmother died 10 days after childbirth.I suspect the child was automatically placed into welfare. The mother was an unmarried, pregnant girl from Victoria with no family around her. Although this may be considered “too long ago” then it does relate to the present, just as any age.In NSW and other states, those affected by adoption need to have free access to all records particularly when they still exist. The Commonwealth law of 2000 does not permit the Adoption Unit to release pertaining records to me according to the co-ordinator on 10th Sep 2012 and I have followed the process gaining the Supply Authority.I do not think an apology is sufficient for those seeking answers and information but hopefully there will be attention to detail soon.I only hope that my second cousin is still alive to know his own history which he requires.We have become very close and I look forward to the day when there is official closure for him. It heartens me to know that perhaps there will be many family reunifications.