TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 11 °C Wednesday 22 May, 2013

Column: Symphysiotomy was seen as a gateway to childbearing without limits

Chairperson of Survivors of Symphysiotomy, Marie O’Connor explains how women’s pelvises were unhinged to avoid Caesarean section, which was disliked by Catholic hospitals because of its association with “the crime of birth prevention”.

Marie O'Connor

SYMPHYSIOTOMY IS A cruel and dangerous childbirth operation that unhinges the pelvis, severing the symphysis joint or, in the case of pubiotomy, sundering the pubic bones.

Ireland was the only country in the developed world to practise this discarded surgery in the mid to late 20th century.

Caesarean section had been the standard treatment for difficult births in Ireland since the end of the 1930s. However, doctors’ preference for symphysiotomy saw 1,500 of these 18th century operations being performed from 1944 onwards, mostly in Catholic private hospitals. Around 150 women survive today, many of them permanently disabled, incontinent and in pain. One baby in ten died during the process and a number were brain damaged.

Women were occasionally informed their pelvis would be broken, but most were not.

Some believed they were going to have a Caesarean section. Others were symphysiotomised under general anaesthetic during pregnancy, or, as in Olivia Kearney’s case, to ‘deliver’ a baby already born by Caesarean.

The majority, however, were left for many hours in the labour ward before being operated upon, wide awake, without their consent. One woman described the wire saw used to cut her pubic bone as being ‘like broken glass’, tearing into her.

Push through the agony

After the surgery, women were still in labour. Sometimes the baby took hours, or days, to come; then they had to push for as long as it took, through the agony of an unhinged pelvis. In one case, where the baby was in a brow position– incompatible with vaginal birth– it took four hours of ‘maternal effort’ to get the baby out. Those unable to give birth vaginally were eventually given the Caesarean section that had earlier been withheld.

Instead of nursing women as surgical patients, midwives further destabilised the severed bone or joint by forcing women to walk on their broken pelvises, often within a day or two of giving birth. Some fainted from the pain. Discharged from hospital without medical advice or painkillers, women were sent home to sink or swim. Many never recovered.

The surgery was an abuse of power, a pre-emptive surgical strike against the practice of birth control by obstetricians who disliked Caesarean section, on account of its association with what Archbishop McQuaid termed the ‘crime of birth-prevention’. Undergoing four such operations was widely seen as the upper safety limit. Symphysiotomy, in contrast, was viewed as a gateway to childbearing without limitation.

Long shunned by doctors on account of its dangers, symphysiotomy was revived in 1944 at Holles St Hospital as a replacement for Caesarean section in certain cases. Pregnant women were used as guinea pigs there in the 1940s and ’50s and this experimentation reached bizarre heights at the Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, then under the ownership of the Medical Missionaries of Mary.

False claims of ‘unsafe’ Caesarean sections

Women were also used as clinical material to train staff bound for overseas. One woman reported seeing a camera in the operating theatre at the Lourdes Hospital just before she lost consciousness. The low cost operation was seen as invaluable, especially for trainees from developing countries, in hospitals that aimed to become international training centres.

Regulatory failure allowed the practice of this mutilating surgery for half a century. Hospital reports detailing these operations were ignored.

False claims that Caesarean section was unsafe until the 1960s and that symphysiotomy was performed for medical reasons are still being made.

Official briefs continue to reflect the myths propagated by the Department of Health, which has allowed itself to be captured by the body whose members committed these atrocities, namely, the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

The courts represent survivors’ sole route to truth and justice. But actions that are brought outside the time limit (two years since 2004) cannot succeed. The clock runs from the time that you become aware that your injuries resulted from wrongdoing or negligence. In some cases, the date of that knowledge is unclear. These were covert operations: three or four decades elapsed in most cases before women understood that their pelvises had been broken. Many were having a first baby, and knew nothing about childbirth. All of them, without exception, assumed, or were told, that whatever was done was necessary to save the life of the baby. The medical profession closed ranks, in general. Few admit any connection between women’s ill-health and their symphysiotomies.

The knowledge that this was wrongful surgery came slowly and painfully, in fragments heard in the media or read in a newspaper. Accepting that one has been abused is difficult: denial is easier.

Ms Kearney’s case was initially dismissed in the High Court on the grounds of undue delay. Now that the veil has been rent on these abusive operations, the Oireachtas should lift the statute of limitations for survivors, for a brief period. This was done for victims of sexual abuse, a far more difficult area to legislate for. There are no floodgates, only 130 or so mainly elderly women, standing, waiting, for justice.

Marie O’Connor is the author of Bodily Harm: symphysiotomy and pubiotomy in Ireland 1944-92′ and the chairperson of Survivors of Symphysiotomy, the support group for victims of the practice.

Dáil hears calls for justice for survivors of symphysiotomy>

Read next:

Comments (61 Comments)

  • This article would bring tears to your eyes

    Reply
  • I have never read so a thing before. How could women be treated so appallingly? All this in the name of Catholic dogma wrapped up in some belief invented by men opposing birth control. The doctors who supported such barbarism such be exposed for such horrors. Another crime committed by the Catholic church! Shame on you!

    Reply
  • I’m totally appalled and shocked to hear that things like this were allowed to happen, and all with the consent of the so called higher powers. But even more shocking is that educated people like the Doctors who were trained in human anatomy thought nothing of ‘breaking a woman’s pelvis with a saw- bone’. How barbaric is that! What were they thinking??

    Reply
  • I can’t actually read this whole article it’s that disturbing, ‘sent home without advice or painkillers to sink or swim’ – disgusting

    Reply
  • its sickening that the church still have a say in hospitals .

    Reply
  • Holy mother of f*ck! I actually couldn’t read the whole thing. I’ve had a baby by caesarian and am pregnant again now. The thought of some barbarian doing this to me and my baby in the name of religion really upsets me. Crazy cultish maniacs. Dr Neary style

    Reply
  • I would just like to register my disgust at this depraved, violent and sexist practice. The sooner these repugnant imbeciles are removed from all areas of Irish social life, the better.

    Reply
  • You could only have four Caesarean sections, max, many doctors believed, on safety grounds. So to carry out a CS on a woman expecting her first child was to limit her family to four. Carrying out a aymphysiotomy stopped ‘a lot of awkward moments’ that could arise in ‘conversations’ about birth control, according to Mr Justice Sean Ryan in the recent High Court case. Ireland is the only country in the developed world to have practised these pelvis-breaking operations in the second half of the 20th century.

    Reply
  • Is there no limit to the pain and abuse that was inflicted on the Irish people by this repugnant organization? The roman church’s record of oppression is seemingly endless. Thugs in collars!

    Reply
  • “Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.”
    Steven Weinberg

    Reply
  • words fail me… that’s just vile and inhumane. that’s one of the many reasons I would never ever refer 2 myself as a Roman Catholic………pathetic cult!

    Reply
  • This was an extremely difficult piece to read. I’m a mother of two wonderful children and thankfully I had the health to be with them every step of the way. I feel for those women. It was like an excerpt from a horror novel, all the time reading it my mind was saying “surely not, how can civilised humans treat each other like that” In regard to Catholicism, I’ll quote Spiderman “with great power comes great responsibility” and the higher they put themselves on pedestals the further removed from morality they become. They try to become the icons they push us to pursue….delegating their orders as religious instruction…pointing their fingers like judging Gods. Well we point our fingers back and remove those pedestals so that the can see the cost of their arrogance.

    Reply
    • What cost really? Children are still being indoctrinated everyday – most with the full consent of their MOTHERS and fathers! And here in Ireland they mostly got away from having to pay proper monetary compensation. Blind faith indeed or just sheep!?!?!?

      Reply
  • These procedures were barbaric. Nevermind the blasted church… the doctors involved should be held accountable, instead of hiding behind the church or state. Those doctors took the hippocratic oath, to do NO HARM. They personally have their own morals and values to abide by. These procudures were not best practice at the time and yet they went ahead with them.

    They most certainly harmed these women.

    Reply
  • What is the connection between Caesarian section and birth control. Was this only done in Ireland????

    Reply
  • Really.really don’t know what to say anymore about this evil church. This article has sickened me to my core.

    Reply
  • The twisted and primitive logic of the Catholic church lives on today. We will hear the “heart felt apologies” and the usual excuses that it was only some individuals etc.
    We can be glad that these merciless brutal evil thugs are losing their grip on Irish society.

    Reply
  • The two year time limit was introduced by governments seeking to please the insurance lobby. Ireland followed the US in this. Even after the scandal broke 10 years ago, no attempt was made to contact any woman to inform her that she had been subjected to this surgery. The authorities turned a blind eye. The difficulty in some of these cases lies in proving the date of knowledge, which is when the clock begins to tick. The knowledge that these covert operations were wrongful came in fits and starts, however, through the media. The statue of limitations was not designed for such cases. It should now be set aside for 12 months to ensure that no survivor is barred from access to the courts.

    Reply
  • This is disgusting. No limit to the sick stuff that is tied to religion. Even the premise of forcing women to breed like rabbits is sick. Yet 84% of people in the census let their names be signed as being members of this vile sickening,organisation.

    Reply
    • Yeah. I was curiously struck by that as well Cyril.
      Perhaps the inherent effects of brain washing from inception can somehow allow people to disassociate from the Roman Church in a ‘casual’ manner, like not going to church of a Sunday, but when it comes to the more tangible aspects of dissociation like formal defection, or indeed filling out the census form, it’s a step too far.
      At 84% it would be still reasonable, despite the proof of the vileness of this institution, to still regard the country as Roman Catholic rather than Irish. Erin go Bragh my arse!

      Reply
  • In 50 years I gaurentee we’ll be looking back and be saying the same things about denying women abortions…

    Reply
  • TOT 02/04/12 #

    This story is yet another disgraceful example of how the catholic church in Ireland ruled with an iron fist!
    I am so thankful I didn’t live in that era and my sympathy is with the people who suffered in all aspects of their “dictatorship”. No disrespect to the good ones and hopefully the “bad eggs” are living in their shame!

    Reply
  • @ Debi-Nikita Rathbone-Rentzke

    Unfortunately, they were not thinking of the poor mothers at the time. They were doing what they were told! Sadly, doctors didn’t have a voice then or else they were so brainwashed like many others by the catholic church in Ireland at the time. One just has to look, read and remember what happened in the ‘Laundries’. That was catholic Ireland. The church even told the gardai at the time what to do.

    Appauling, barbaric disgusting crimes against another human being. Reading the above ‘breaking a woman’s pelvis with a saw – bone’ is just inhuman. Shame on the church.

    Those poor women need justice before they die. Many of these women have had pain all their adult life. Give them justice and peace before it’s too late.

    Reply
  • is there no end to church crimes

    Reply
  • My late Mother in law possibly could have been one of these victims as she had her first child in Holles Street Hospital around 1958-59. The baby sadly died and incredibly she was told by a sick fecker of a Nun, a nurse or even the Matron, that the baby would remain in limbo and not go to heaven as it wasn’t baptised! What a thing to say to a young Mother after just losing her First Born!

    Reply
  • Why is there a two-year limit on seeking redress anyway? If a person does not seek compensation for a wrong they know to have been done to them, the reasons seem likely to be all the wrong ones – that they were afraid of the wrongdoer, whether for physical or religious reasons, or that they did not have any faith in the system’s ability to protect them if they spoke out.

    I’m sure I’ve heard of perfectly good reasons for such statutory limits, but they elude me now.

    Reply
  • If you were a woman taking part in such a vile operation on a women giving birth. hang you head in shame,, If you were a man grow a pair and admit you took part in what can only be described as an act of terror and thank god it wasn’t your mother that had such a thing done to her,,, I’m disgusted to the pit of my stomach by such a barbaric act,,

    Reply
  • AlMar 01/04/12 #

    This is truly shocking stuff. It is abhorrent to treat any person in such a way, with no regard whatsoever for their dignity and rights.

    However, we need to be very clear. There is NOTHING in Catholic teaching or dogma that necessitates or justifies this behaviour. Quite the contrary in fact – unnecessary damage to patients runs counter to Catholic morality.

    Yes, it is true that some so-called Catholic doctors (and even priests and nuns) MAY have justified this abuse on the basis of what they perceived to be Catholic teaching, but they were manifestly wrong in doing so. If they behaved in this way, it was their own private, warped behaviour, and not the teaching of the Church. Just like today, there was much ignorance in Ireland 50 years ago about what the Church actually teaches.

    Undoubtedly there will be many red thumbs and people still wanting to blame the Church. But the desire to blame the Church doesn’t in itself make it the Church’s fault. If you want to blame the Catholic Church, please show me exactly what doctrine of the Church justifies this abuse, and how it can be squared with the fundamental Catholic principle that one can never commit an evil act, even for a good intention.

    Reply
    • @almar….do you copy and paste this reply every month?

      Effing church apologist…

      Reply
    • Almar
      Thought we’d meet up here!
      Personally I’ve no objection in the least to the Catholic Religion as a belief and a teaching to it’s followers. I have strong objections to the institutional Roman Church as a repressive regime intent on influencing the law of the land and the thoughts of people for no other good reason than to further it’s own interests. One of it’s methods was by the influence of the schools of midwifery and obstetrics to teach principals of outdated procedures in the pursuit of it’s outdated polices on birth control.
      And please Almar, don’t start saying it was the Jansenists or the Jesuits or some other offshoot of catholic doctrine that was responsible for this, it was the Roman Church following it’s own agenda of expansionism – more babies, more catholics.

      Reply
    • AlMar 01/04/12 #

      Gavin: Play the ball and not the man, please.

      If my response seems similar to what i have said before, it is because the same error is being repeated as before.

      Reply
    • AlMar 01/04/12 #

      John: Please show me what Catholic teaching justified this barbarism? It simply was not opposition to artificial contraception or a desire for larger families. That just does not justify mutilating women. It is a fundamental principle of Catholic teaching that one cannot do an evil act, even if good may come of it. So, even if one thought it was good that women have more children, the Church condemns any evil acts that would bring this end about.

      Note: I don’t deny that this evil happened. I’m open to the possibility/probability that some grossly misinformed Catholic doctors thought that they were doing something good. But if they did think this, it was their own warped misunderstanding of Catholic teaching. As for Jansenism, you seem to be under some form of misunderstanding here. Jansenists are not Catholics. They are heretics. By definition they have ceased to be Catholic; they are not an offshoot of the Church. There was far too much Jansenism in the Ireland of the first half of the 20th Century, and it could well have played a role in all of this.

      If individuals want to blame the Church for this cruelty, the burden of proof is on them to show what Catholic teaching justified this action. Unsurprisingly, nobody has yet been able to do so.

      Reply
    • Almar
      These procedures were carried out in Catholic hospitals on Catholic women by Catholic medical practitioners who were trained and instructed in Catholic training establishments. There is no more to it. You can’t imply that it was ‘snuk’ in the back door by a few unprincipled fanatics. These were state funded hospitals under the management of the Roman Catholic Church – the buck stops with them – the inseparable Church and the State.

      Reply
    • You may very well be correct AlMer, perhaps it strictly speaking contrary to church teaching. But then neither was it church teaching that abuse of children was tolerable and should be covered up, but it was how the church worked.

      The reality is this practice was confined to Catholic run hospitals, and was carried out therefore with the knowledge and one has to assume at least the tacit agreement of the orders running the hospitals – nothing, absolutely nothing, happened in hospitals in those days without the matron being well aware of it, and the matron was always a nun.

      So even if blame cannot be pinned on church teaching, it certainly can be pinned on those who represented and were part of the Catholic church. The difference is little more than semantics.

      Reply
    • AlMar represents the establishment Irish view. It’s bleeding obvious that the obstetricians wouldn’t have practiced symphysiotomy on, for the most part, uninformed women without receiving orders from the Catholic church to do so first. 

      But, in the Republic of Ireland, we still haven’t rejected the idea that our country is a catholic state for a catholic people. The preamble of our constitution starts with “In the name of the most holy trinity….”. I don’t think our up and coming constitutional convention is going to consider changing the preamble.

      What we need is a new Constitution, a secular constitution. 

      Reply
    • @Allmar
      What is this Catholic Teaching that you’re talking about? Catholicism started as Christianity, whose teachings come only from the Bible, then the Church gained power, and added its own spin regarding divorce contraception etc. Unlike any other religion that has an unarguable religious text and nonnegotiable rules, “Catholic Teaching” as you call it comes from any Church authority given the power to instruct. And as John and Katherine have already stated, this procedure was taught by Catholics in Catholic institutions. Don’t try and avoid blame like they did for the child abuse cases, Magdalene laundries, Spanish Inquisition, Crusades, Invasion of Ireland, nepotism, corruption during the Renaissa…I better stop myself here.

      Reply
    • @Gavin Tobin,

      I think he is. I think he feels that if he keeps posting the same post over and over again, he may actually start believing it himself!

      I wonder does he blame the nuns and priests in the Laundries for what they did to the poor young girls, and not the catholic church? Probably. They did that themselves, Rome didn’t teach them to do that sort of thing, beating the crap out of the girls and also molesting, raping them while in these hell holes of ‘laundries’. Shame on the church, shame on you ‘Almar’.

      Reply
    • This is nonsense and yet another example of how Vatican apologist re-use the “bad apple” excuse on every occasion, even when it’s clear that abuses occured high up the hierarchy and were covered up.

      http://www.imt.ie/opinion/letters/2009/07/symphysiotomy-abuse-claim-unfair-to-obstetricians.html

      “Alex Spain [Master of the NMH] revived symphysiotomy at the National Maternity Hospital (NMH) in 1944. By then, symphysiotomy had long fallen into disrepute. Spain himself admitted that symphysiotomy was ‘an entirely new procedure … that has to be faced against the weight of the entire English-speaking obstetrical world’. By 1944, Caesarean was well established in that world as the treatment of choice for obstructed labour.

      Contrary to what the Institute of Obstetricians and Gymaecologist would have us believe, symphysiotomy was never a norm. It was shunned––also on the continent of Europe–– because of its dangers, which had been amply described in the medical literature. In addition to the prospect of a dead or damaged baby, there was the certainty of a severely injured mother. As far back as 1803, the procedure had been damned by Prof James Hamilton of Edinburgh: ‘in no case whatsoever’, he said, should it be resorted to.

      Spain’s successor, Arthur Barry, championed the practice in the 1950s. But it was attacked by British doctors, who counted the number of babies left dead and brain damaged as a result of the surgery. Donal Browne of the Rotunda also pointed out that Caesarean would result in fewer infant deaths and less maternal injury.

      Symphysiotomy was preferred to Caesarean section for ethical reasons. Barry described Caesarean as ‘the chief cause of the unethical procedure of sterilisation’. Caesarean also encouraged the laity ‘in the improper prevention of pregnancy or in seeking termination’, he told a Catholic medical congress in 1954. ‘If you must cut something, cut the symphysis’, he urged.”

      More about Barry in Ferriter’s book (unfortunately I can’t cut and paste) on Google Books:

      http://tinyurl.com/d75j7wn

      It’s an open-and-shut case to me that symphysiotomy was championed here for Catholic reasons.

      P.

      Reply
    • Almar has got a point. Why was it only in Ireland this barbarism took hold when there are plenty of Catholic countries in Europe? Was it because of our own, national, inborn taint of shame and oppressing our own. Women are in a position of weakness, and a historically oppressed race often turns in on whomever of its own it can oppress, rather than rise up and overthrow the oppressor – because it has forgotten how.

      McQuaid strikes me as a war criminal in a war that was internal and peculiarly Irish and full of Irish shame.

      Reply
    • That said I remember watching the documentary about this barbaric, cruel and inhuman practice and whatever its origin, it is horrific and we need to dismantle,fully and remorselessly, every branch of the structure of shame that encouraged this kind of practice to go on. It is the same reason why mentally ill people have been afraid to speak up.

      Shame. Shame on the family. Shame on the neighbourhood.Shame of the flawed body. Shame. Shame. Shame.

      Reply
    • You ask how such actions could ever have been squared with the teachings of the Catholic church.

      Why does anyone say one thing and do another? The Catholic Church is not its doctrines and teachings. It is its actions, which – it being a human organisation – are centrally concerned with furthering its own survival and influence. And these actions very much include behaviour it either deliberately overlooks or positively encourages in institutions where it has an official role.

      That we were ignorant – now or then – of what the Catholic Church preaches is almost entirely irrelevant. We were largely ignorant, but are becoming less so, of what it actually does.

      Reply
  • I don’t get all the red thumbs! Can you people please come out of the shadows and show yourselves? By clicking on the red thumbs you disagree with peoples comments but are you endorsing this practice? It seems like you are to me.

    Reply
  • What you have written about other mothers who had a symphysiotomy is what I experienced spontaneously i suffered the same labour as you described except if could feel my pelvis is the front breaking. I had no pain relief as they were worried about the health of my daughter. I had a very small body frame and am only 4ft 10in. My daughter was 7lbs. but would not fit through my pelvis until it broke. I was screaming at them that something was wrong but nobody took a blind bit of notice. Even my husband complained to no avail. I am today 55 and still suffer back pain and pelvic pain, have trouble walking and sleeping and had to give my job up 3 years ago as I could stand this no longer. We women who suffered like this should have redress also. I have a long medical history regarding this but didn’t know what had happened to me and didn’t know the word Symphysiotomy until recently. Nobody in the medical profession told me. I did have to have physiotherapy several times and even stayed in St. Josephs in Harold Cross for 2 weeks of intense physio a few years ago to no avail. My case was a cover-up by Holles St. Thank you for reading, Maureen Doran

    Reply
  • I’m sorry I still don’t understand the connection, I thought in ‘those days’ women were encouraged to have as many kids as possible, people had families of 10/12 , that was common? Maybe I’m thick.

    Reply
    • Joan.
      The author makes it clear in a post in the comments section. It was once held that a woman could have no more than four caesarian sections in her lifetime for safety reasons, thereby limiting the amount of little Catholics that the woman could have. Because contraception was illegal in this country and sections had a ‘whiff’ of abortion about them the preferable option was the mutilation of women thereby avoiding these ‘sinful’ practices and allowing the production of Copious Catholics to the Churches Content.

      Reply
    • AlMar 01/04/12 #

      John: Really now. Caesarian sections have a “whiff” of abortion about them??? Give me a break.

      Please show me how the practice of deliberately mutilating women unnecessarily can be squared with the fundamental Catholic teaching that one cannot do an evil act (unnecessary, enforced mutilation) to bring about a good (Copious Catholics, in your wording).

      If some individuals did it, it was their own warped interpretation, not the Church’s teaching.

      Reply
    • Almar
      I response to that I can possible refer you to the comment by the author of this excellent article posted above where she quotes Mr. Justice Sean Ryan as saying that the mutilation of women by this procedure ‘stopped ”a lot of awkward moments” that could arise in ”conversations” about birth control’. Make what you like of that rather oblique quote. I have.

      Reply
    • As regards giving you a break regarding a ‘whiff’ of abortion about caesarian section. Have you ever heard of a Hysterotomy abortion? If not look it up.

      Reply
    • Almar
      I’m hittin’ the hay. I do wish ya well. I’m sure we’ll ‘stick it to each other’ pretty soon. ‘Night to you.

      Reply
    • Ah,sure let them die from whatever ailment they were prone to so long as they they obeyed the twisted logic set by celibate males.

      Reply
    • P Wurple 02/04/12 #

      John, i dont think it was the abortion connection…. It was birth control they were trying to prevent.

      The pill.

      Reply
    • P Wurple
      Their twisted minds were concerned with birth control in all it’s forms including abortion. I may have concentrated more than I should on the abortion issue in relation to this article. However, there are still countless women travelling abroad for abortions because of the evil influence of this organization upon the laws of our land.
      I have no agenda as regards the rights or wrongs of abortion in the general sense but I do believe that this foul organization, because of it’s history and record in matters of sexual morality, should have no influence in the enactment of our laws on such matters.

      Reply
  • Surely the medical profession is the source of this problem. The church sponsorship sound like an emotive conspiracy theory unless real evidence exists?

    Reply
    • Robert
      The health service and schools of medicine were by and large in the hands of and at the influence of the Roman Church for most of the last century.

      Reply
    • The whole hospital set up was weird then, even weirder than now. Catholic hospitals employed Catholic nurses and Catholic doctors, for the most part anyway. The were obsessed with their Catholic ethos and those they employed had no choice but to work in line with it. Nuns walked the corridors and made sure everything was ‘correct’.

      Protestant hospitals were run along much less rigid and interfering lines, but were looked on by much of the Catholic public as godless places to be avoided. The opposite was also true – non-Catholics, which in those days basically meant Protestants, were highly suspicious of Catholic hospitals, but there was certainly more reason for that fear.

      This division still exists to some extent. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I think that’s one of the reasons why there are some people so vehemently opposed to the new Children’s hospital being out on the M50, because that if it was there the nearest Adult teaching hospital would be Tallaght, where the students are from Trinity and the three hospitals from which it was formed (the Adelaide, the Meath and the old National Children’s Hospital) were all founded by Protestants and looked on as Protestant hospitals.

      Reply

Add New Comment