A response to the government apology by Karen Constantine
I welcome Keir Starmer’s apology, but it simply doesn’t go far enough.
I found Starmer’s apology for historic forced adoptions, given in Parliament on 2 July, a textbook, stage-managed event. At the same time, he was gazing up at a hand-selected group of women and their partners in a gallery directly aligned to his sight line (great for the cameras), others sitting around me were openly weeping and silently sobbing—sometimes alone—in the public gallery. The long-fought-for public apology wasn’t given to a cohesive group in the public gallery. Rather, at the commencement of proceedings, a “chosen” group was led out of the public gallery, separated from the surprisingly few supporters sitting patiently waiting. Realising what was happening, Professor Gordon Harold (Cambridge University) leapt to his feet to complain to the usher about a blatant exclusionary tactic. “What about the others?” he asked. [Cambridge research helps lead to UK Government apology on forced adoptions | University of Cambridge]. Indeed, the government’s apology contributed again to “engineered trauma”—a key feature of the era.
This apology, so hard-fought-for, so precious, so needed, at that moment morphed into a cynical exercise in reputation management.
Why am I harsh? Why can’t I just be “grateful?” Good questions.
Firstly, the apology wasn’t as inclusive as we would have liked. We didn’t expect Starmer to reel off a comprehensive list, but dead babies, dead women, and unmarked baby graves failed to even get a mention. This comes hot on the heels of the superb exposé of St. Monica’s in Kendal, which Stephen Hindley had campaigned for 20 years to highlight. [Forced adoption scandal: Evidence sent to Cumbria Police about 61 baby deaths at church-run home | ITV News].
There was no clarity (honesty?) from the PM on the true numbers impacted. 185,000 first mothers who had their babies taken from them is a woeful understatement.
There was a somewhat casual mention of the sinister era operating beyond 1976. We’ve repeatedly given evidence that it continued into the mid-1980s at least, and asked for recognition of that.
Clarity is required on the full scope of impact. And yet, no further research has been commissioned…
There was a canny reannouncement of guidance to local authorities to retain relevant records for 100 years instead of 75. Why not an instruction to retain them as provided in Northern Ireland?
Not a word on memorialisation or archives, both vital.
No clarity on support services for first mothers. In common with the Church of England’s apology, who also said “sorry for what happened to you” (not “what we did to you”), but provided nothing more concrete. Good intentions butter no parsnips. Many first mothers cannot find support; it is a support desert. Unlike Nicola Sturgeon’s apology, where some peer support was in place prior to her apology.
It is evident that many, many people who would have liked to attend never received invitations or notifications. I simply cannot understand the need for secrecy. An opportunity of a lifetime was lost for so many. Some are extremely hurt and retraumatised.
The apology was timed, sandwiched between the Church of England’s and the publication of the Northern Ireland Truth Commission. [Independent Panel Truth Recovery NI]. There’s no comparison between the depth obtained in Northern Ireland and the UK’s light-touch approach. Nor was Dr. Gallen’s (Trinity College) recommendation to ‘co-create’ the apology heeded—a central point he made to the powerful change-making Education Select Committee.
The government has provided funding—a paltry £4 million over three years (across England, Wales, and Scotland—does anyone know?). How much of that will trickle down into useful ‘services’ remains to be seen. I wonder how Starmer’s team calculated this figure. What is it for? What is it supposed to deliver? How are the outputs and outcomes going to be measured?
But perhaps the most egregious aspect was the complete absence of reparation. Nothing to concretely acknowledge the lifelong harm done.
Nothing.
Zip.
Zero.
Let’s recap: unfathomable harm done by the State to an unknown number of women and adult adoptees. Simply put, state-sanctioned human trafficking. Obscene and systemic breaches of human rights on an industrial scale. Downplayed. Minimised. An opportunity missed.