BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest

Subject: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: wyrdolafr
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 02:58 PM

Not a particularly nice story at all, but does a couple of interesting issues. Firstly, the disparity between male and female sentencing for this kind of crime: maximum sentence for a woman is 7 years, whereas it is a life sentence for a man. Secondly, the woman appears to have got a High Court injunction to stop the authorities taking her children off her. It's unclear whether "a Catholic right-wing organisation" gave the woman support in getting the injunction or just supported her actions (in going for the injunction) generally. How does this kind of thing happen? Who would support an injunction for this?

I'd hope this was a given, but given some of the threads on here in the past, you never know, so I'll state quite clearly: this is not a criticism of the Irish, Irish women, Irish Catholic women in general. It's the kind of terribly ugly story that could happen anywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: jacqui.c
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 03:22 PM

I can maybe see where the disparity in sentencing might have come from - probably the result of thinking that the man generally is the perpetrator in cases of incest and the female the victim. It's a shame that there was a limit in this one.

I wonder whether anyone from this "Catholic right-wing organisation" actually visited the home or spoke to the children before supporting this woman. Maybe they should be looking out more for the welfare of the children than the rights of the mother. Christ was pretty clear on that point, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: MartinRyan
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 03:32 PM

The "disparity" actually arose because, relatively recently, the maximum sentence for men in incest cases was increased drastically from the century old original value. It appears nobody thought of changing it for women.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 03:46 PM

It makes it an increased offense against those abused if there is some kind of bizzare 'well it's less bad if it's a woman' thinking...

Having said that, I don't know what we can do with abusers and seriously neglectfull parents. My instinct would be to sterilise those who repeatedly demonstrate neglect, and permenently incarcerate those who sexually re-offend.

And me a libertarian and all.

I do however take the rights and liberties of those who are innocent to be of far far greater importance than those who would wrongfully and knowingly infringe upon them...

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 05:21 PM

Where were the social workers?

Where were the teachers?

Where were the police?

Where were the neighbours?

Where were the parents whose kids went to school with them?

Where was the father/s?

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 05:24 PM

its a bit cheeky and intrusive - prosecuting that crime. Several schools where I taught - it was well suspected that it went on. I can't recollect anything much ensuing from it.

Its what some families do. generally poorly educated, and living in difficult circumstances.

god alone knows what you would be up to, if you came from a background like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: jacqui.c
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 05:43 PM

its a bit cheeky and intrusive - prosecuting that crime

Possibly, if both parties consent to the act. Here it is clear that the child was forced into having sex with his mother, the one person above all who is supposed to care for her child. No way is that intrusive - the child did not want it and the mother was just WRONG.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 05:45 PM

Vice is nice, but incest is best huh?

Sorry, I don't buy that as anything but a saying we used to use in college.

Ugly story....

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 05:55 PM

I think using the term 'incest' in cases such as these is not entirely appropriate. This is child abuse pure and simple.Not sure what the maximum sentence would be for that but they should keep the woman as far from children as possible!

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 11:19 PM

"Incest" is technically the right term. And given the family attitude to hygiene it soulds like a pretty unpleasant business, but I would think worse of a father raping his daughter than what happened in this case.

It drives me to wonder whether Ireland still has the old UK law position (at least I think the UK has updated the law) about "rape" - the definition used to be "It is an offence for a man to rape a woman".

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: alanabit
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 04:29 AM

I know that lawyers say that exceptional cases make for bad law. In this case, although horrible, the incest was really a side issue. The more pressing question is why this very sick woman was ever left to neglect her children for so long.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 05:21 AM

This sounds like a tragedy of human circumstance to which the incest is incidental, however so titillating a cause whereby to judge this woman without knowing the full facts of the case, which must include her own case history. Journalism works my isolating emotive issues from their overall causal context, resulting in the sort of moral outrage we see on this thread, which personally I find more than a little creepy.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 05:55 AM

Why is this any different because of the fact the perpertrator is female?

For the rest of his life, that young boy, every time he has sex/makes love will be haunted by what his sick mother made him do..

He may well be severely damaged in his attitude to women, and that damage will ricochet out to the women he's with.

I hope, with all my heart, that this doesn't happen, but can you imagine the images that will be forever in his mind?


She should have the severest punishment, and those who should have defended and protected her children should be hauled across the coals for their total laok of care.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: greg stephens
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 07:02 AM

Couldn't agree less Lizzie. This sounds to me like a case for treatment, not punishment.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: GUEST,caroline.m
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 08:03 AM

i think its absolutely disgusting that the health board involved let down those children in the worst possible way.i think that woman should be shot.their lives have been completely ruined by her.i just hope that they're getting all the love and care that should have been provided by a person that is classed as their "mother".what a vile creature she is.she obviously knew her treatment of them was very wrong.look at the lenghts she went to when she knew that social workers were visiting.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 08:06 AM

Make that very creepy.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: GUEST,mary clarke
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 08:11 AM

i couldn't agree with you more but as another person has said where was the father[s],teachers etc.it's another case of people knowing and turning a blind eye.hope they're capable of having agood nights sleep,can't be easy with guilty consciences!

Mudcat policy requires a Guest to chose one nickname only and use it on a consistent basis. Please choose between mary clarke or caroline.m and use just the one. Thank you,
co-moderator

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 08:52 AM

Where were..... the church - aiding and abetting from the sound of it.
"Its a bit cheeky and intrusive"
Al, once again I find your comments totally off the wall - it's ok right as long as its kept in the family - do I have that right?
"Its what some families do. generally poorly educated, and living in difficult circumstances."
This is deeply insulting crap - incest takes place right across the social spectrum and does not respect national barriers and it damages the victims deeply.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 09:08 AM

I was abused myself. I don't experience moral outrage, just grief on behalf of the children. And much personal rage resulting from my own history. Which does not make me the right person to respond in a non-emotive or impartial fashion.

I do think in extremely cold pragmatic terms about child abusers. Whoever they may be. I don't like the idea that a mother abusing her son is somehow a greater or lesser offense than if it were man. And incest is extremely destructive to a child. A profoundly damaging violation of boundaries.

Some abusers *can* be rehabilitated, and I believe that there are criminally pitiful - indeed non-existant - public resources for those who would voluntarily seek help for their impulses and behaviours.

In studies, I believe it has been shown, that where a paedophile seeks treatment *voluntarily* there is greater hope of the treatment being succesful. Where treatment is imposed as a consequence of them being caught at it. Far less so.

There are peadophiles out there - who do not offend. There are paedophiles out there who compulsively offend, but who cannot control their own drives and live in torment all their lives. I know that these people do seek help, almost always privately. These people will no doubt have histories like mine, some less severe, some moreso. And I have immense compassion for their struggle.

But where there are repeated instances of the same offences over many years, and there is no recognition on the part of the offender that what they are doing is wrong or no evidence of any desire to seek help, until of course, they get caught... There my interest in their case history, mitigating circumstances, or their rights and freedoms, dies a stone cold death.

As I say, my own history makes me not the most impartial person in the world. And I do aknowledge that.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: MartinRyan
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 11:19 AM

The Irish law on maximum penalties in incest cases was in fact changed in recent years to remove the differentiation, in light of this case. However, the change cannot be applied retrospectively.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 11:33 AM

"Couldn't agree less Lizzie. This sounds to me like a case for treatment, not punishment."


Her children will get 'treatment' Greg, for something they should never have had to have 'treatment' for in the first place.

It is a mother's duty to protect her child, first and foremost, above all other things, putting them even before her own life.

To have not only sexually abused one of her children in this way, but to have been so deeply unkind, and so incredibly uncaring to her others, beggars belief.

There are times when my sympathy lies only with the victims, not the perpertrators. This is one of those times.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Big Mick
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 12:44 PM

Sleepy Rosie, you touch my feelings. Your assessment should be read, and thought through thoroughly by any that profess to want to understand and deal with this problem. Folks write whole tomes on this subject that do not capture its essence as clearly as your 7 paragraphs did.

I was sexually abused as a kid by a Scout leader. Over the years I came to understand how profoundly I was affected by this. Usually some event happens, and all of a sudden another piece of understanding hits. Reading your post was another of those moments.

Thanks, and..... all the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 01:33 PM

,one thing puzzles me here.,a woman can not force a male[of whatever age,to have an erection,and to have sex].
how can a woman force a man to have sexual intercourse.
I agree that this is a very terrible case,however this woman is an alcoholic[a medical disease in itself],she needs treatment.
I agree that the people who suffer the most are the abused,so I am not making excuses for her behaviour.
apart from her drink problem,what were the rest of her circumstances,who was the father/ fathers of the other children,did this woman have any other relatives,if she did why did they not act,what were the social workers doing?
how was it that she forced her son to have sex with her ?

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Megan L
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 01:43 PM

",one thing puzzles me here.,a woman can not force a male[of whatever age,to have an erection,and to have sex]."

Having worked with at least one male victim of rape I can assure you that what you said is the same bollocks as a man who claimed a woman consented because "She was wet for me" Human sexual organs respond to stimulus and can be prepared whether the victim is a willing participant or not, this often adds to the mental trauma suffered by the victim afterwards espicially if they are brought into contact with ignorant fools.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 02:06 PM

Having worked with at least one male victim of rape I can assure you that what you said is the same bollocks as a man who claimed a woman consented because "She was wet for me.
not the same situation at all[imo],I agree that the mother could have groomed the child,and indoctrinated him into thinking it was ok,but that is not rape,[rape is a violent action].
I agree it is a terrible thing to do.
sending this woman to prison will not help to cure her,what will happen,is that in prison she will meet similiar types,who will advise her how to work the system and say the right words to the social workers,
what needs to happen,is that cases like this are prevented,
why wasnt it prevented,.where were the relatives ,social workers,and fathers of the children,
this case has been sensationalised because the perpertrator was a woman,cases like this involving men[because they are more numerous]do not make front page news.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: jacqui.c
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 02:26 PM

sending this woman to prison will not help to cure her,what will happen,is that in prison she will meet similiar types,who will advise her how to work the system and say the right words to the social workers,

I think that it's more likely that she will have to be kept in solitary to avoid the wrath of other prisoners, much as male sex offenders are.

Rape is not always a violent action. Rape occurs when one party does not agree to sex but it happens anyway. Sex with an underage child is called rape because the child cannot agree to sex, whether they were willing or not. This case is more than rape - it is a betrayal of trust by a parent.

It is likely that all these children will have a hard time with self image as they grow up. They will probably blame themselves for the fact that their mother would not care for them and it's going to take some heavy counselling to get them past that. I only hope that the system, having failed them for so long, will now make sure that they get all the help possible to get them through this.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 05:26 PM

I hadn't read the story Jim.

The woman certainly sounds in need of help sorting herself out. I can't see prison achieving much. If you are prey to such drives - you are very sick.

strange that no health visitors noticed the state of the house.

I stand by what I said though. there is a place I have taught in as a supply teacher, not far from here where the kids are very knowing - like the kids in The Turn of the Screw.

later I met a teacher, who'd also worked in the school, and he confirmed that it was huge problem in that community that the teachers could do not very much about. It seems to be what the community accepts.

What if its brothers and sisters, rather tham Mother and son?

When I did a teaching practice in Lincolnshire village school. Our college suggested that we used the school'd 19th century logbook as a primary historical source for teaching. Gasps of amazement from the staff ....apparently all the logbooks dealt with incest in families that were still local.

it makes you wonder about the veneer of civilisation.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Janie
Date: 23 Jan 09 - 07:54 PM

The prime function of prisons and prison terms is to provide societal justice and consequences for violating societal rules. Punishment. Some prison systems also offer treatment and rehabilitation services, but that is not the purpose for inprisoning someone.

There are very good reasons why incest and sex with children are such strong societal taboos. Sexual abuse is much more common than many people realize. Think of how much more often it would occur without the strong social doctrination against it.

Treatment and consequences should not, imo, be considered as either/or. I think punishment must be imposed, for the sake of society, and treatment should be offered.

Sex offender treatment is a very specialized practice, and I don't provide it. I do complete assessments, however, and make recommendations for treatment, with which probationary violators have to comply as a condition of their probation.    It does not have a very good success rate, largely because the vast majority of sex offenders do not accept full responsibility for their actions (to echo Sleepy Rose.) It still should be offered, however.

I do occasionally see instances where probation is appropriate for sex offenders.    In the case of incest, however, I think there always has to be a prison term.

The minor, whether it is a young child, or a teenager, is never, ever, responsible for being sexually abused by an adult. The adult has all the priviledges, and all the responsibilities that go with being an adult. One can understand and have compassion for a parent or other adult who abuses kids (sexually or otherwise) who may themselves have been products of an abusive childhood. But one can not let them off the hook for failing to carry out their adult responsibilities.

Sleepy Rosie and Mick, thank you for sharing so intimately to help others understand.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 04:21 AM

It seems a recognised 'ultra conservative' Catholic 'pro-life' and 'anti-divorce' campaigner may have been involved in stopping the children being removed from their abusive mothers home and taken into safety. This from the Irish Herald:

"Ultra conservative Catholic campaigner Mena Bean Ui Chribin (81) is showing no remorse after been named in court as a person who contacted health officials to argue the family needed support not intrusion.

The woman for whom Bean Ui Chribin wrote a letter of backing was yesterday jailed for seven years for 10 offences including incest and the sexual assault of her young children.

The letter to the health board was sent just days after the self-confessed "worst mother in the world" secured a High Court injunction preventing children being taken into care.

[...]

And in an astonishing remark, she said that health workers could "answer for their own sins".

"Hump the lot of them," she said yesterday.

During the shocking trial, childcare manager Paddy Gannon said that he was contacted by the long-time pro-life and anti-divorce campaigner in 2000.

The communication was made around the same time that the mother got an order restraining the then Western Health Board from placing the children in the care of their maternal aunt.

Mr Gannon had no evidence that she was involved in the court application but he suspected it, the court heard."

Here is a relatively scant Timeline for key events in the case, from the Irish Times which seems to manage some sensitive reporting on the issues that this and related cases raise for Ireland in particular.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 04:44 AM

Ahh, I found it again! Was gonna post a link to this article in the Irish Times about issues of Parental Rights V's Childrens Rights in Ireland:

"IT IS now 16 years since Judge Catherine McGuinness, as she then was, recommended a constitutional amendment to protect the rights of children in the context of the family.

This arose from her report on what was known as the Kilkenny incest case, where a man had sexually abused his daughter over a number of years and the social services felt constrained from intervening in the family because of the protection given to it by the Constitution. Article 41 guarantees to protect the family and the INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE [my caps] "on which the family is founded". Thus only the marital family has specific recognition.

Article 42.5 states: "In exceptional cases, where the parents for physical or moral reasons, fail in their duty towards their children, the State as guardian of the common good, by appropriate means shall endeavour to supply the place of the parents, but always with due regard to the natural and imprescriptible rights of the child."

In her report McGuinness said: "The very high emphasis on the rights of the family in the Constitution may consciously or unconsciously be interpreted as giving a higher value to the rights of parents than to the rights of children.""

Interesting...

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: The Sandman
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 05:41 AM

I disagree with Janies remarks.
we should be focusing on why this happened.
in the present financial climate,if there isnt money for proper training and proper supervision,this will keep happening .
in fact to illustrate my earlier post,a local man was arreasted for 22 cases of sexual abuse,this was reported in my local paper,it did not make the front pages of the national newspapers.
meanwhile, those people who have helped to ruin Iceland are in the cayman islands,if we wish to use emotive terms rape of a different kind,however through these poeoples actions,trhere will be less money available to deal with social problems like the R

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: The Sandman
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 05:43 AM

to continue...like the Roscommon woman.[my previous post was mysteriously sent,before I had corrected typos spelling ,or even finished it.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 06:54 AM

I think what makes this case of "special" interest are the legal and (and even certain cultural) details, which are specific to cases of abuse within Ireland itself.

a) The case highlights that there is a constitutional and legal disparity between cases of children who are abused within *married* families, and those abused within unmarried families in Ireland. Children from *married* families are less protected than those within unmarried families. This because of the (what I can only assume to be a religiously based) constitutional bias towards protecting the institution of marriage.

b) It also highlights that there is a further serious disparity between maximum sentencing for cases of incest involving a woman, and those involving a man. This presumably (?) based on (what I think most people who work with victims of incest would disagree with) that a mother sexually assaulting her child (or, female adult assaulting a younger sibling), is somehow a 'lesser' offense than a father (or, male adult assaulting a younger sibling) sexually assaulting his child.

It would seem therefore that reporting on this case is in fact, not merely about titilating words like "incest" (not merely incidental, but fundamental to the case), or about condemning "monster mothers", but raises some extremely important concerns about disparities in the way the Irish constitution treats particular cases of abuse. And the various implicit (culturally and religiously founded?) biases contributing to these disparities, which evidently require serious examination and re-evaluation.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: MartinRyan
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 07:10 AM

Sleepie Rosie,

Re b).

As mentioned earlier there IS no disparity in maximum sentencing - there WAS. Of necessity, this case was tried on the basis of the law at the time of the offence.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 07:16 AM

Ah, so I see. I missed that.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 08:24 AM

Prison serves three functions, one in two ways. Which is the "prime" purpose is a political construct of a given time.

THey are: -

1. Denoting societal disapproval (punishment)
2. Prevention of re-offending - because teh offender is not free to re-offend (incarceration)
3. The discouragement of future offences
(a) By the offender through treatment and rehabilitation
(b) By the offender or others through fear of punishment.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: The Sandman
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 10:16 AM

Richard , prison is supposed to serve these functions , whether it does, is debatable.
this woman is suffering from a medical condition [alcoholism].
is sending someone to prison the best way to cure alcoholism?
will sending her to prison,stop her committing the offence when she is let out?.
how much does it cost to keep her in prison for seven years,and would that money not bebetterspent on better training,and more well trained social workers to prevent other cases happening.
removing her from her family ,prevents a repetition of these offences,there is no need tosend her to prison,what would be better would for her to be on probation and do seven years community work.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: The Sandman
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 11:08 AM

Or,is it that people are so upset, they wish to seek punishment?
if that is the case,why not find some other form of public humiliation that costs less.
in some muslim countries this woman might have her hand chopped off,or be publicly executed,500 years ago in England,she would have been put in the stocks, every day, for a period of time,probably a more effective humiliation and punishment than prison .
surely, the priority must be preventing this occurring again ,plus counselling for the abused.
every day that this woman spends in prison,she is using money that could be allocated for prevention of future abuse

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 11:25 AM

I think I am inclined to agree, Captain.

However the man-child should also receive paid preferably by the mother.

But if the mother is imprisoned, then the chemical addiction to alcohol and habituity should both be over by release and treatment for her psychological dependency might stand a better chance.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 12:56 PM

"would that money not be betterspent on better training,and more well trained social workers to prevent other cases happening."

Captain Birdseye, I agree with some of what you say.

Prison sentences whatever their supposed purpose, seem to neither discourage abuse in the first place, nor prevent offenders reoffending.

RBridges 'purpose of prison' may indeed be the official rational or spin, but it's one which has been intellectually (not by him personally, I think he's just offering a professional take on the matter) reasoned out in this way *retrospectively*.

I don't know anything about the history of crime and punishment in this country, but I'm pretty sure that most social punishment (even as it currently stands) has evolved out of a pretty basic instinct in human beings for a desire for vengeance.

Now vengeance is a whole other delicate matter, an interesting one that aught not to simply be swept away in our 'enlightened' times. And I believe there may be a (yes, we are strange psychological animals) case for the psychological healing of survivors (or indeed a traumatised society) requiring a form of retributive atonement, which is cathartic (the Greeks seemed to understand a lot of this stuff a bit better than us lot) and potentially re-empowering and restabalising.

I cannot *make the case* for that myself (though it has been demonstrated to me via the experiences of others) but I believe it is nevertheless a factor which aught not to be dismissed out of hand as too 'uncilvilised' or 'ugly' to warrant honest, non-squeamish and pragmatic meditation upon. (I imagine this suggestion will alienate me substantially from fellow socialist and liberal leaning thinkers on this forum. But... Fortunately I don't give a fuck.)

But THE most important thing, is indeed, the prevention of re-offence, and the protection of vulnerable children. And of course, the big question is, as indeed you say, how to achieve this?

Well, in in the instance posted above, clearly there are cultural and institutional issues which contribute vastly to this particular case. Which will no doubt become a significant and even potentially seminal one in terms of bringing about required change - or so one may hope.

But so long as there are powerful and profoundly influential institutions and organisations (be they religious or secular - though I suspect almost exclusively religious in cases such as these) which promote their own peculiar, rigid and dogmatic agenda at the expense of the utterly innocent and vulnerable, there must be major upheavals on multiple levels (culturally, socially and educationally) involved.

I hoped to organise my thoughts much, much better here, but I'm already too saturated in Chardonnay for useful thought frankly!

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: The Sandman
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 02:01 PM

I see no logical reason , why the stocks cannot be reintroduced,as a form of punishment .,it will cost less than keeping this woman in prison .
if I had been abused like this,I probably would get satisfaction from throwing shit at the perpetrator

    *

National News Home
Search Query: Independent.ie Web Search

By Tom Brady

Monday September 25 2006
IT costs almost €¼m a year to hold a prisoner in the high-security jail at Portlaoise. The average daily prisoner population in Portlaoise, which houses mainly dissident republican activists or inmates transferred from elsewhere for security reasons, is estimated at 121.

IT costs almost €¼m a year to hold a prisoner in the high-security jail at Portlaoise.

The average daily prisoner population in Portlaoise, which houses mainly dissident republican activists or inmates transferred from elsewhere for security reasons, is estimated at 121.

Portlaoise tops the financial league for prisoners in custody because of its unique security features. At €240,700 per prisoner, the costs are way ahead of Mountjoy, which is in second place at €100,400, and St Patrick's Institution for young offenders at €90,700.

The figures are contained in the latest Irish Prison Service annual report. The cheapest running costs are at Loughan House, Blacklion, Co Cavan - an open centre, which holds an average of 74 male offenders.

The cost per prisoner is based on the average daily number of offenders in custody last year and includes actual running costs such as prison officer pay, overtime, food, light, heat and maintenance.

Rising

The average cost of keeping a prisoner in custody is estimated at €90,900, with rising wage levels mainly responsible for pushing up the figure from the previous year.

However, prison officials estimate that annual savings in excess of €20,000 per prisoner can be generated in the new prison campus at Thornton, north Dublin, when it replaces the Mountjoy complex.

Officials said the installation of state of the art security features such as electronic locking systems and extensive CCTV would enable reductions to be achieved in operating costs.

The new facilities would also allow authorities to carry out detailed security assessments of every prisoner. At present, prison designs mean that all prisoners in Mountjoy and St Patrick's are subject to similar levels of security, regardless of their offence.

Lower security levels, officials pointed out, equated to lower staffing numbers and significant financial savings.

Costs will also be reduced by locating 30pc of Ireland's prison population on a single site at Thornton with shared facilities such as healthcare, laundry, baking and catering.

Capacity

The report shows that most prisons operated at or near full capacity during the year. The average daily number of prisoners in custody was 3,151, a slight decrease of 1.5pc on the previous year but the average count of female inmates jumped by 6pc to 103.

An average of 5pc of prisoners were allowed out on temporary release, a significant decrease on the previous year.

Most of those were on a structured parole programme, often under the direct supervision of the probation and welfare service, while others were set free for compassionate reasons such as ill health or death in the family.

There were three jail escapes in 2005, all from the Dochas Centre for female offenders in Mountjoy. Another six offenders escaped from the custody of prison officers while either attending court or receiving medical treatment.

A total of 81 prisoners absconded from an open centre or while on accompanied outings with an officer, a prison chaplain or other support services. Forty-nine of those were returned to custody by the end of the year.

- Tom Brady

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Janie
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 05:42 PM

I didn't express myself very clearly above. All societies have sanctioned, institutionalized methods of punishing individuals who violate the rules and mores of the society. I think the expression of social disapproval and deterrence are inherent in the concept of punishment.   Incarceration is one form of punishment. It may serve purposes in addition to punishment within the context of a particular society at a particular point in time, but I think it's primary societal function is punishment.

To my knowledge all social groups impose punishments on those who violate social codes. While it is certainly true that social mores vary from culture to culture, including mores regarding what kinds of punishment are appropriate, all societies have formal systems of punishment, and for good reason. We can look at what is happening right now in Congo and Somalia where war has shredded all social order and see the effects of lack of institutionalized constraints on human behavior on a massive scale. I think that is an indication that institutionalized punishment does serve to constrain the behaviors of a significant number of members of a society, at least to the point that society can mostly fulfill it's necessary functions. The idea of treatment and rehabilitation is relatively modern, and only partially supported and funded as an expression of the values and intent of most societies who have added that element in as an adjunct to incarceration and punishment.

Captain Birdseye,

Again, I say it is not either/or. Certainly an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and I am a believer in and advocate for offering treatment and help to all who are willing to take advantage of it. I am also an advocate of personal responsibility. I believe each of us bear responsibility for our own adult choices, whether or not other individuals or the institutions of society do the same.   My parents, spouse, community or society may have failed in their responsibilities toward me. That does not, ultimately, absolve me from responsibility for my own actions.   I agree that alcoholism is a disease, and there is no question that alcohol both impairs judgement and disinhibits behaviors. Nonetheless, I am responsible for my choices, whether I make them drunk or sober.   I think the difference in our positions for the purposes of this discussion is simply that we are looking at it from two different perspectives. You are focusing on the needs of the individual and the ways that society may have failed the individual.    I am focusing on that delicate balance between the individual and society. Both are valid perspectives. I am not a big "law and order" type, and think we have way too many in prison in the USA. In the case of incest or sexual abuse of children, however, I think the interests of society combined with the interests of the individual victimized carry more weight than the interests of the perpetrator, and the direct actions of the perpetrator are so egregious, first to the child, and then to society, that inprisonment is called for. Social institutions certainly failed these children, and probably their mother. She is still ultimately responsible for her choices. I think incest must be punished by incarceration, not as revenge, but as a necessary societal communication of the value society places on that taboo.

Sleepy Rose, I've pondered similar questions myself for a long while. The ball of yarn that includes justice, vengeance, social control, the rights and responsibilities of society and the individual, and our innate attributes as human animals is an awfully tangled one. I don't think I agree that the idea of social punishment is inevitably seated in the desire for revenge, but it certainly can be. In some cultures vengeance is a clearly articulated piece of their sense of social justice. In others, or at other times within a culture, social justice is a mask for vengeance. Humans would not be endowed with the capacity to desire vengeance if it did not have functionality. So does justice serve vengeance, or does vengeance serve justice? Probably some of both, and the mix varies depending on the individual, the issue, and the times. I also think vengeance and justice, whether social or individual, is intwined with the need for validation. (what is more invalidating of personal boundaries, identity and bodily integrity than abuse!)

I know a lot of what was contained in "Courage to Heal", especially regarding repressed memories has been discredited, and with good reason.   Still, there is some value found in that book for those working toward healing from sexual abuse, and I occasionally draw some from the book in my public practice, which is heavily wieghted with adults who were physically and/or sexually abused as children.    This quote in particular is worth pondering: Living well is the best revenge.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: GUEST,shoo
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 05:45 PM

you cant blame mena bean ui chribin for what happened them poor kids, its that monster of a mother, just because ui chribin signed a letter for her , she still reccommended that they needed help... the fact that every1 seems to think that she knew wat was goin on in that house( in rosscommon) is ludicrous.. she lives in north dublin for a start.. i pretty much think that as a mother herself, if she had of known wat was goin on in that house, she would have done all in her power to protect the children!!!! the mother in this case only got 7 YEARS- where is the justice in this.. if some1 were to kill her theres a good chance that they wud be out in 7 years also.. this country is a complete joke!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Janie
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 06:27 PM

Somehow, the distinction between blame and responsibility seems pertinent. blame vs responsibility.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 07:28 PM

Maybe that Catholic leader should for once have eschewed Catholic doctrine and taken care to speak from knowledge not from ignorance and superstition.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: skipy
Date: 24 Jan 09 - 08:46 PM

Couldn't agree less Lizzie. This sounds to me like a case for treatment, not punishment.
I agree! the treatment should be lead, a 9mm injection will do it!
Skipy
Prepared to administer it if the law allows!

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 07:26 AM

Shoo, the woman in question has I believe been involved in anti-divorce campaigning for many years.

She has been actively and *successfully* involved in many cases which have resulted in the prevention of children from married families, being taken into care. Seems to be a bit of a personal hobby horse for her...

From what I've read the mother received FUNDING to fight her case (and won it), from whatever Catholic organisation this woman currently works with.

A constitutionally supported Catholic agenda, which sees it's own anti-divorce dogma, to be of more importantance than the welfare of children in abusive married families, unfortunately greatly empowers such meddling small-minded people as this. It looks like social workers in such cases, have their hands somewhat tied.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: bubblyrat
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 12:34 PM

Well, I do not know the full facts of the case (although I suspect that "it" may be more common than polite society would like to admit),but it seems to me that the "punishment" is a bit severe.I mean,why punish the mother,and,therefore,by extension,the son,who may well be now rendered even more vulnerable and confused after Mummy's sudden departure ?? If he didn't even know that bonking Mummy was not on the agenda, then obviously he must be two fiddles short of a ceilidh band.Still, I suppose it gives the interfering,self-opinionated,holier-than-thou ,higher echelons of the Irish "establishment" an excuse to seize the moral High Ground (again ! ).

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Jan 09 - 03:23 PM

'two fiddles short of a ceilidh band....'

nice one!

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 05:22 AM

"'two fiddles short of a ceilidh band....' nice one!"
The plight of this family came to the attention of the Social Services in 1998 when the eldest would have been around 5 years old, which suggests that abuse was not just a part of the lives of these six children, but WAS their lives.
They were subjected to ill-treatment, neglect and rape by a mother who was an alcoholic and obviously incapable of fulfilling her duties as a parent; by their fellow pupils who bullied and taunted them because of the state in which they were sent to school; by social services who failed recognise the situation and by a religious nut who intervened to help prevent them placed in protective care.
It seems that the army of abusers who made the pathetic lives of these children miserable, possibly to the point of destroying them, have just recruited a number of willing volunteers from this thread.
What kind of people are you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: wyrdolafr
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 06:29 AM

bubblyrat wrote: "but it seems to me that the "punishment" is a bit severe.I mean,why punish the mother,and,therefore,by extension,the son,who may well be now rendered even more vulnerable and confused after Mummy's sudden departure ??"

Even more vulnerable and confused? The person that was 13-year-old at the time is now 17 or 18. I doubt very much that he's stood at the window with hot tears streaming down his face wondering where "Mummy" is and when she's coming home. You're making it sound like he'd be a little kid. I think, if anything, "Mummy" is probably lucky this young man hasn't turned around and given "Mummy" a good hiding for what she's done now that he's not so little.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: wyrdolafr
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 06:54 AM

Here's an update on the inolvement of Mena Bean Ui Chribin: Ultra-catholics under fire over horror house

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 06:57 AM

I think possibly one of the saddest elements in this case, is that the children wouldn't have been spirited away by insensitive authorities to some anonymous chidrens home, but that they had a *close female blood relative* (the mothers sister) with whom they were already living part-time, who wanted to raise them permenently in her own home...

With the aid of some interfering Catholic busy body, the abusive biological mother succesfully prevented them going to a secure and loving home with an Aunt who they evidently knew well, and who genuinely cared for them.

But seriously, is there any point even replying to comments from posters who evidently have dog shit for brains?

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: wyrdolafr
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 07:26 AM

Sleepy Rosie wrote: "think possibly one of the saddest elements in this case, is that the children wouldn't have been spirited away by insensitive authorities to some anonymous chidrens home, but that they had a *close female blood relative*"

That's one aspect I'm struggling with myself. If the aim of Mena Bean Ui Chribin was to keep the family together - which I think is misguided to say the least when applied to circumstances like these - then I think it's peculiar that local, immediate relatives are disregarded like this. Their intentions seem to had exactly the opposite effect. Whereas the kids could have spent the last 'x amount of years' together, living locally with kin, they're now broken up living in separate homes &c.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 07:57 AM

Well it begs the question doesn't it. Did this Mena woman actually know *anything* about the specifics of the case which she intervened in?

And which is worse?

Her intervening *with no knowledge* of the specifics, purely for the purposes of promoting her religiously fueled agenda?
Or intervening *with knowledge* of the specifics, purely for the purpose of promoting her religiously fueled agenda?

In any event from comments she has made, she appears to harbour a serious antipathy towards unmarried families. It seems pretty clear that she would have had no interest in becoming involved in the case, had the parents not been married. Thus keeping the "family" together, seems something of a side-issue altogether.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: jacqui.c
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 09:30 AM

Having read through this thread and noted the discussion on imprisoning this woman one thing occurs to me.

The one really good reason that I can see for putting this woman behind bars is that her children will be given a modicum of security that she's not out there looking for a way to get them back or to do them more harm.

Now, to a rational adult, that would probably not seem to be likely but, to a child who had to suffer through years of ill treatment and abuse, who can say what their fears are. The knowledge that Mommy Dearest CANNOT get at them has got to be worth whatever it costs to keep her there.

At the same time she will, hopefully, be dried out by the time she comes out and maybe have had some sort of treatment for her addiction and perversion.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 01:16 PM

hang on,havent the children been in care since 2004/
the HSE are responsible,not any catholic organisation,the hse are just trying to pass the buck.
final decisions rest with the HSE,So another organisation trys to stop ther family being split up.
here is what the HSE should have done,contacted the organisation,to see how much detail they knew of the case,then come to a decision,that they didnt know much, then ignored mena bean organisation,and put the family members into care.
the HSE and no one else is responsible,they make the decisions.
MENA BEAN are a red herring and irrelevant .

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: MartinRyan
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 01:21 PM

I'm afraid Bean Uí Chroibín is almost certainly a red herring. As I understand it, when the mother sought her High Court injunction it was ex parte i.e. in the absence of the other party (the Health Board, at the time). The judge, in effect, made a temporary decision, pending a challenge. The Health Board failed to challenge it - and I doubt if a single letter from an activist was the reason. It will be interesting to see the results of the promised enquiry.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 02:45 PM

There was an insightful and extremely convincing article in yesterday's Sunday Times (Irish edition presumably) based on an interview with Bean Uí Chroibín, which makes it quite clear that she is not somebody whose voice would have carried any weight on this case (dirty, smelly and a fruitcake were the descriptions, I seem to remember).
The mother in question is obviously somebody with her own problems, alcoholism not being the largest of them.
The social services and the courts have obviously let the affair slip through their nets.
It has to be asked why the local authorities, the church, the police nor the neighbours did not take up something that has been going on for so long.
There is a frightening tendency for some people to knee-jerk when something like what today's Irish Times describes as an extremely complicated case hits the fan. Before people start throwing the rope over the branch and dragging the prisoner out of the jailhouse, perhaps it might be wiser to wait until we know the full facts.
Going half-arsed at this in order to find a scapegoat is not only unjust, it leaves it open for the same thing to happen again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jan 09 - 02:49 PM

PS Re 'Irish woman jailed for incest' - it needs also to be remembered that a similar case, with much more violent connotations was concluded last week in the Scottish courts - as I said earlier, incest, rape and abuse of any kind recognises no social, denominational or national borders.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 31 Jan 09 - 04:28 AM

Noa's Blog

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 31 Jan 09 - 04:40 AM

Sorry, I pressed 'submit' in error there...

Yesterday I discoverd the beautiful music of Noa Bursie...and this morning, I read her blog, which I've posted above..

This is her main page:
Noa Bursie


I needed to put her words down in this thread, not only for those who have been so wounded by things that have happened to them, and who have, so bravely, put their own words down on here...but for those who seem to think that this woman's son will regard it all as a bit of joke...

They have not an ounce of understanding in their souls....

My mother, it took 57 years for it come out, with her.

My best friend's sister in law, staggeringly beautiful, staggeringly intelligent, staggeringly emotionally bruised and battered.

My former boss's wife, who rose to be Dean of her hospital, but at night was often to be found curled up in the foetal position on her bedroom floor, trying to protect herself. It spilled out of her on the day they took me out to dinner, just prior to me leaving to have my first child. A whole group of us, their best friends amongst them...none of them ever knew before, had any inkling..until that moment, when she just needed to tell people, other than her dear husband, who'd known since he first met her.

It is the children who matter here. Only the children.

Once the perpertrators have crossed that line, they have lost any sympathy from me.

Subject: RE: BS: Irish Woman Jailed For Incest
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 31 Jan 09 - 03:53 PM

its an easy 'out' to take the moral high ground. call people monsters - undeserving of compassion.

As jim points out the story could be repeated ad infinitum many places in the british isles, and one suspects all over the world. Its not an irish problem specifically.

the story is basically about people who a feel excluded and become depraved; lose sight of the moral stop signs.

It isn't just the children who matter - its all the human beings buried in these situations.

theres all kinds of ways to fail as a human being. don't be in too much of a rush to claim superiority for your route to damnation.