Excerpt: Human Rights Abuses in relation to Commonwealth Policy of Forced Removals

October 2011 Dr. Christine A Cole (Phd)

Punishment

In 1960 Dr. Wessel[1] warned adoption workers that not allowing women access to their infants was punitive and cruel and served no medical purpose. In 1965 Mary Lewis[2] warned social workers that not allowing mothers access to their infants was punitive and illegal.  In 1967 Sister Borremeo[3] warned that not allowing mothers to access their infants was illegal.   In 1982 a Health Department Circular[4] stated that women who were being denied access to their babies not only had their legal rights violated but were subjected to coercion and duress by social and welfare staff. Social workers were employed by the government and has representatives of the government had been subjecting unwed mothers to bullying, coercion, punitive, inhuman and degrading treatment.   In 1984 Dr. Kath MacDermott[5] described the inhuman and degrading treatment that women suffered because of the policy of forced removal of their infants.  MacDermott stated that women had suffered abusive treatment at the hands of government representative on the basis of their marital status.  In 1992 the Australian Government was advised by Cathleen Sherry that it was in serious violations of a number of International Treaties to which it was signatory.

Imprisonment

Survivors of the unwed mother and baby homes did not feel free to leave. They were threatened with having the police hunt them down. This was not necessarily an idle threat, a mother who grabbed her baby and ran had the police called to bring her back.[6]  Women after given birth were not permitted to leave the hospital until they signed an adoption consent.[7]  The Lady Wakehurst, annex of  the NSW Women’s Hospital at Crown Street, to where unwed mothers were spirited away without their babies, was kept locked, women had their clothes taken and had no access to them until they were permitted to leave.

The Australian State was aware that mothers were expected to sign consents before being allowed to leave the hospital.  For instance the minimum time agreed upon by the Commonwealth and State Minister when drafting the Commonwealth Model Adoption Act was to fit in with hospital procedures.  The government was informed  that mothers were usually not discharged until 5 days had elapsed and so it was decided that consent should be taken before mothers were allowed to leave, so they “would not have to be chased down”[8].  In other words, to ensure that mothers did not have a chance to garner support and keep their infants. So it seems the Commonwealth and State governments conspired with adoption workers to ensure as high as possible number of adoption consents were obtained

Women’s testimony at the NSW Inquiry convey extreme mental suffering because of being incarcerated and forced to sign consents. Some were promised a glimpse of their infant if they signed, others thought if they got out of the hospital they could come back and reclaim their infant.  If they were unable to get support from a strong advocate they were told when trying to reclaim their baby – even only after a few days “sorry your too late, your baby had already been adopted”[9]

Forced Labour

Women were used exploitatively as cheap or free labour in the Homes and in private domestic employment usually arranged by the hospital social worker.[10]

Physical maltreatment. 

Some women have complained that in the Homes and private employment they were expected to work long hours whilst pregnant, were abused by their employer, or by the Matron in the Home.  They were constantly reminded either by the Matron or the social worker, depending on where they were employed, that they had committed a sin by getting pregnant and/or they were carrying an infant for a married couple who were more deserving than them to be its parent.  The constant belittling caused many women to suffer life-long identity problems, poor self image and lead many to self harm.[11]

Isolation 

Pregnant women were not encouraged to form friendships in the Homes, they often felt isolated. They were transported across borders were cut off from their partners, friends and family.  Many were given false names and their mail was interfered with so that their whereabouts was hidden. Family visitation were usually denied to mothers in Homes and mothers working in private employment. Verbal abuse was common as was the constant belittling because of being pregnant out of wedlock.  In the maternity wards they were often left for hours without assistance and when they spoke to nursing staff  were ignored.  One trainee midwife informed the author that she was instructed by her superior that staff were not allowed to speak to the mothers.   In general the women recall feeling continually denigrated, humiliated and isolated.[12]

Conclusion

The interference of the birth process and the brutal separation of the mother-infant dyad has caused life-long pain, distress, predisposed the mother and infant to post traumatic stress disorder and pathological grieving, dissociative and amnesia states, which has been passed on to subsequent generations. The Australian State by failing to acknowledge or validate their suffering by accepting responsibility and offering a heartfelt apology continues to violate their rights under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

[1] Wessel, M. A. (1960). The paediatrician and adoption., New England Journal of Medicine, 262,  441-450

[2] Lewis, M. (1965). Unmarried Mothers, Paper presented at the Australian Welfare National Conference

[3] Borromeo, M. (1967). The Natural Parent, Australian Journal of Social Work, 20(1), 11-13

[4] Health Commission Circular No 82/297

[5] K MacDermott, Human Rights Commission discussion paper no. 5, 1984

[6] Cole (2008) at 247

[7] Chisholm, in Report 21 (2000) at 178

[8] Hon R. J. Hamer Adoption Children Bill, (1964) Vic Hansard, vol 274, pp. 3647-3648

[9] Testimony from the NSW Inquiry: Releasing the Past Adoption Practices 1950-1998,  (2000). Final Report, Report 22; Sherry: 1982

[10] Cole (2008) at 153

[11] Sherry (1992); Cole (2008)

[12] Cole (2008); Cole (2011) Unpublished thesis; Sherry (1992)Lorne-Johnson, S.  (2001)Betrayed Forsaken: The Official History of The Infants’ Home Ashfield, Sydney: The Infants Home Ashfield