![Social worker Iain Smith: 'My own conclusion is [the 'foster' parents] had effectively taken control of the case by the 1980s. They had groomed people, they were manipulating people'](https://www.irishtimes.com/resizer/v2/OXGBVRLTXSKQ5TAUIM3SQMUMAU.jpg?auth=34b99e874ca204a3ab971ae0491fe7a9991988b7a89cc8c681d88bee3a9cc6e9&smart=true&width=1024&height=576)
The press invite from the Department of Children landed into journalists’ in boxes at 9.30pm on Monday.
“Minister Norma Foley will brief the media tomorrow, on the publication of the final report of the Farrelly Commission’s investigation into a disability service in the southeast and related matters, otherwise known as the ‘Grace’ case.”
At last, the repeatedly delayed report, expected to bring clarity to one of the most disturbing and perplexing cases of alleged abuse and neglect of a highly vulnerable person in State care, was to be made public.
After eight years’ work and at a cost of €13.6 million, it would, however, be greeted with disappointment, frustration and anger.
Long-time disability-rights campaigner Fergus Finlay was so forceful in his annoyance at the report that his interview on RTÉ radio the following morning was removed from the broadcaster’s website due to apparent legal concerns.
[ Q&A: Who is ‘Grace’ and what happened in her case?Opens in new window ]
John McGuinness TD, who has campaigned for more than a decade for answers in this case, said he was “baffled” by the report’s findings and described it “gobbledegook”, so difficult was it to read.
The commission, appointed in 2017 by then minister of state for disability Finian McGrath, was chaired by senior counsel Marjorie Farrelly.
Despite credible claims from different sources that Grace had been subjected to horrendous abuse during two decades in her “foster” home, the commission found no evidence to support this. It said she had experienced “serious neglect” and “financial mismanagement”.
Distancing herself from the report, Foley said on Tuesday: “Ms Farrelly is in possession of all of the facts. This is what she has presented. This is her report, her findings.” The Minister criticised the time taken to complete the report, the absence of an executive summary and the commission’s failure to notify individuals who had given evidence in advance of its publication.
The story of “Grace” was broken in February 2015 by the Irish Mirror, which reported that “allegations of sexual and physical abuse of up to 40 children at a foster home” were not being properly investigated by the HSE.
It has gone on to be one of the most investigated cases of alleged abuse and neglect in the history of the State, with reports by Conal Devine and associates (2012), Resilience Ireland (2016) and Conor Dignam SC (2016), as well as extensive hearings at the Public Accounts Committee in 2016 and 2017.
Grace – a pseudonym – was born in November 1978 to a teenage mother. She had a traumatic birth and is profoundly intellectually disabled and non-verbal.
She has been in State care since birth and was placed in the “foster” home in Co Kilkenny around her 11th birthday by the then South-Eastern Health Board (SEHB), initially as a short-term placement. The late middle-aged couple who owned the house, which was never sanctioned as a long-term foster home, provided “respite” breaks for intellectually disabled children. In all 47 children spent time there.
Serious concerns were raised about sexual abuse by the “foster” father in 1992 by the family of a girl who stayed in the home, and by a third girl’s family in 1996. Concerns had also been raised by the Brothers of Charity, who stopped placing young people in the home in 1991.
McGuinness says he “cannot accept” the report’s conclusion that there was not evidence to support findings that Grace had been abused.
While Grace’s multiple bruises, scratches and cuts are recorded by the commission, along with concerns of doctors, nurses, gardaí and other families, “every finding by the commission [on such incidents] went against Grace,” says the TD.
“Grace being battered and bruised constantly is now being reduced to a scratch here and a scratch there that she might have got on the bus or by prodding herself.”
He feels the commission failed to see the humanity of Grace and that it got “too caught up” in recording and parsing evidence without appreciating the real implications of what that evidence told about Grace’s life.
“I understand people get bruises from falls and bangs, especially if you’re vulnerable like Grace, but there was too much of it. There was no drawing that out, making links between all the injury.
“This was not complicated. It is a simple case. She wasn’t cared for. Who didn’t care for her? And tell us why. We still don’t have answers to that.”
Echoing him, Finlay says it is “utterly confusing” to him that the commission could find there was “no evidence” of sexual abuse.
“It may [be] the case, having weighed all the evidence, they decided not to accept it but to say there’s no evidence, I can’t accept it.”
A crucial issue observers wanted clarity on was why the SEHB decided, in October 1996 – a month before Grace’s 18th birthday – to leave her in the home. That decision, at a case conference, overturned a plan made in April that year to remove her on foot of concerns about possible abuse.
Grace then remained in the home until 2009 when a whistleblower applied to the High Court to have her made a ward of court.
Records exist of a school principal, on behalf of the foster father, making representations to the then minister for health, Michael Noonan, asking that the family be allowed keep Grace.
Some surmised the decision lay in there being no grounds to move her when she was no longer under the responsibility of childcare services. There was speculation too about fears within the SEHB that its failure to adequately monitor the home or to investigate credible allegations of abuse there would be revealed if it were to go into a court to seek Grace’s wardship.
Farrelly’s examination of this fateful October 1996 decision is included in the commission’s first interim report. It says that while the option of applying for an emergency care order for Grace was considered, those at the meeting felt “there were no grounds, or that this was not a suitable application, or that it was too late”.
I could see it was a mess as soon as I started giving evidence. It was Kafkaesque. We were being asked questions about stuff that wasn’t contentious. The important issues weren’t being explored. In May 2019 It was very clear to me it was going nowhere
— Iain Smith
While all at the case conference “believed that Grace should be moved” the rationale for the reversal of the decision to move her “was not recorded by the case conference ... minute”, the report states.
This failure to record the rationale is described but not commented on and its implications are not discussed in the report. The “why” of why she was left there remains unanswered, says Finlay.
“And I find it impossible to understand how that question is difficult to answer because it was a public servant who made that decision. There should be full notes of their meetings.”
Iain Smith, one of the two whistleblowers in the case, gave evidence over 27 days. He describes the outcome of the commission as “a mess”.
“I could see it was a mess as soon as I started giving evidence. It was Kafkaesque. We were being asked questions about stuff that wasn’t contentious, or which could have been summarised, which dragged it out. The important issues weren’t being explored. In May 2019 It was very clear to me it was going nowhere.”
In his view the commission was too focused on interrogating records, policies and procedures and not enough on how the health board services interacted with Grace’s “foster” family, and the psychological dynamics in the family.
“My own conclusion is Mr and Mrs [X] had effectively taken control of the case by the 1980s. They had groomed people, they were manipulating people, they remained in control,” says Smith.
“They compromised the health board services to the point where the services were caught in a double bind. If the social workers wanted to publicise or investigate this it would end up reflecting badly on the entire service.
“There are so many questions still need to be answered. But who is going to answer them now? In the end, sadly, I don’t think there are going to be any answers.”
The “foster mother”, who died in January last year, was predeceased by her husband. She took part in the commission without legal representation.
When she spoke to The Irish Times at her home in February 2016 she appeared upset by abuse allegations, describing them as “nothing but lies” and “cruel”.
“I loved [Grace]. She was like my own, but they could have moved her if they wanted her,” she said of the 1996 period.
“They said, ‘Do you want to keep her?’ and I said, ‘Yes.’ She was very happy here. Then I rang the health board asking to know if they would give me any money to keep her and they said, ‘No’, because when she was 18 she wasn’t their concern any more. That was the end of it.”
The report is extremely difficult to read, say those who have tried to.
As well as no executive summary, there is no timeline of events, no chronological narrative, no overall table of contents and no unified pagination. Instead, the report is divided into multiple volumes, each with multiple chapters, and each chapter with its own page numbers. Nor is there an index.
It appears every syllable of evidence heard has been written into the report, says Smith. “It reads like a stream of consciousness or a dream.”
Social policy consultant Brian Harvey, author of countless complex reports, says there appears to be “no synthesis of the evidence” and “all evidence at all points appears to be equally valued.
“There is no weighting of the value of the evidence, nor the different aspects of the story and how they affected the outcome.”
A “serious weakness”, he says, is that there is no section containing conclusions, issues arising or recommendations.
“As a result, we are left with a report which, by focusing entirely on evidence presentation and assessment could be seen as ‘implication-less’ to current and future services for vulnerable children and adults.”
The most recent update to Foley from the wardship committee representing Grace says she “continues to thrive in her placement”.
Marjorie Farrelly, the chair of the commission, has been asked to respond to concerns raised about the composition of the report and its conclusions.
