The horrors endured by women and girls in New Zealand’s unmarried mothers’ homes have been laid bare - including a resident beaten in labour and forced to give birth on her side so as to not glimpse the baby that was taken and adopted out.
A landmark report into abuse in state care has detailed the experiences of women and girls who had their newborns taken from them and adopted out to married couples from the late 1950s to 1980s, the so-called “baby scoop” era. Those include:
The long-awaited report of the Abuse in Care Royal Commission, six years in the making, was released yesterday. That included women and girls sent to unmarried mothers’ homes, after the campaigning and efforts of a group who had earlier petitioned Parliament for a Government inquiry into forced adoption.
One of those advocates is Maggie Wilkinson, who gave birth at St Mary’s Home for Unwed Mothers in Ōtāhuhu, Auckland (Anglican). Her daughter Vivienne was adopted out shortly afterwards.
Now 80, she told the Herald that reading the inquiry report - which features her testimony - was extremely difficult, and brought mixed emotions.
“I am thankful that the crime and cruelty of abduction from the ‘homes for unwed mothers’ has been acknowledged in the recommendations, but am very upset that public hospitals, judgemental social workers, GPs etc have been left out of the equation.
“Our only chance for being heard was through the Royal Commission, but too many have been left out.”
Forced adoption was covered by the inquiry report (which covered 1950 to 1999) in a chapter on the experience of women and girls.
Those sent to the homes often had no other choice, and were coerced or pressured into adopting out their babies, the inquiry found, and they suffered abuse and neglect, much of it “layered with misogyny and sexism”.
“Gendered abuse was particularly evident in unmarried mothers’ homes. Young girls and women were subjected to verbal abuse, physical abuse and forced labour, medical abuse during pregnancy and childbirth, and psychological and emotional abuse through being coerced or forced to adopt out their babies.
“The demonisation, dehumanisation and subsequent abuse of girls and women in the homes were justified or reinforced by religious beliefs… their children were seen as in need of rescue and redemption by being adopted to respectable families.”
Losing their babies led to profound grief, and affected the rest of their lives, women told the inquiry.
“Māori women and girls who were either birth mothers or babies adopted through closed adoption practices faced severance of connections to their whakapapa, language and culture.”
In the 1950s and 60s access to contraception was restricted, the inquiry noted, and the Department of Social Security was reluctant to grant the unemployment benefit to unmarried mothers.
That and “intense discrimination and judgement, often based on perceived promiscuity” forced many into unmarried mothers’ homes, run by the Anglican, Catholic and Presbyterian churches and the Salvation Army. Some facilities also operated as maternity hospitals and children’s homes, which also arranged adoptions.
The 1955 Adoption Act meant only the state could approve adoptions, but, despite this, church agencies and the Salvation Army continued to actively facilitate adoptions in the following decades.
Susan Williams, a survivor of Bethany Home (run by the Salvation Army) in Wellington submitted that “we were all sent there to hide our shame or just hide”. Expert witness Barbara Sumner told the inquiry the Bethany homes were akin to an adoption agency or programme.
The pressure was heightened for vulnerable women already in care of the state themselves. One Māori survivor, who has a learning disability, was readmitted into Lake Alice Hospital in Rangitīkei with her 3-month-old baby when she was 24.
Her baby was taken by a social worker two days after admission.
“I did not give informed consent to [my child] being adopted, I did not have any way of understanding what was happening and my rights,” she told the inquiry.
Survivors of the homes recalled being called “filthy”, “dirty” and “whores”. The matron at St Mary’s Home for Unwed Mothers in Ōtāhuhu, Auckland (Anglican), was particularly cruel. Women and girls there were not allowed to use their own names, and were referred to by the matron’s surname, “Gallagher”.
She told residents that if they didn’t obey her, their babies would die, and made them complete gruelling chores and work, right up to birth.
Nancy Levy, who was sent to the home in 1968 just before her 17th birthday, recalled being made to clean the floors with a toothbrush, “on all fours, for hours and hours”.
Hunger and malnutrition were a hallmark of the homes. Maggie Wilkinson said the residents of St Mary’s were starved because Gallagher wanted them to have small babies that were easier to deliver.
Women and girls were given medication without consent. Christine Hamilton was given sedatives and narcotics when in labour at St Vincent’s Home of Compassion in Auckland, and woke the next day, 17 hours after giving birth, with her son gone.
Hamilton, who is now 70 and lives in Australia, told the Herald that the report “stirs up all your deep feelings that you keep close to your heart”.
“As a mother who has lived her life without my son - now 51 - nothing will repair the damage to him or me.
“I’m pleased that this part of NZ history is coming to light in a meaningful way, and hopefully we will be acknowledge for all the pain and suffering that adoption has caused. I would like to see the Home of Compassion take responsibility for the trauma caused to our babies and mothers.”
Another woman, “Mrs D”, told the inquiry of being left alone to labour for three days, except for when she was physically beaten by a matron, who told her she deserved it for being promiscuous. “Mrs D was forced to give birth lying on her side, so she would not catch a glimpse of her baby,” the inquiry report noted.
Patricia Salter was sent to Childhaven Home for Unwed Mothers in Epsom, Auckland (run by the NZ Council of Christian Women) at age 14.
“Nobody stopped to ask how a 14-year old child had become pregnant or whether I had been abused or traumatised,” she submitted.
The abuse continued when she went into labour and was sent to Auckland Hospital.
“I was treated like dirt. While I was having the baby, the doctor or nurse slapped me across the face. After the baby was born, they stitched me up with no anaesthetic or pain relief.
“The baby was taken away from me straight away. I had no say. I have never seen that baby again. I have blacked out a lot of what happened at that time because it was so traumatic.”
There was constant pressure on the women and girls to agree to adoptions, which were organised with the co-operation of state social welfare workers, and quickly approved by the Department of Social Welfare.
Many adoptions were “closed”, with a new birth certificate created that claimed the child had been born to its adoptive parents. Māori missed the chance for their baby to be raised by a relative as a whāngai, and for them to know their whakapapa and tikanga.
When the woman or girl returned home families often instructed them to never speak of the ordeal or child again.
Kaaren Dunn, 78, was pressured into giving up her baby by a network of social and health workers, but never entered an unmarried mothers’ home.
She told the Herald that history was missing from the inquiry report.
“They called it confidential pregnancies. I went through that system. I went through the Salvation Army, to a private obstetrician and gynaecologist, he then referred me to Nelson to a private obstetrician and gynaecologist, and he arranged the adoption.”
While pregnant Dunn stayed with a private family.
“They basically treated me like a servant - I had dinner with them one night a week. The rest of the time I cleaned and looked after the kids. It was very isolating.”
In 1965 she was admitted to a public hospital to give birth, and put in a room by herself.
“The way the deliveries were done then, they were done under general anaesthetic, so you didn’t actually see the baby. They were taken away straight away. My understanding is the adoption had already been arranged.
“The hospitals have got a lot to answer for in terms of their involvement with adoption. And they have been missed out of the equation completely.”
The commission was established in 2018, initially to look into abuse in state care, and later expanded its remit to include religious or “faith-based” organisations.
The final report is 2944 pages long in 16 volumes, and found fault with successive government ministers and departments, and a range of religious organisations including the Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, the Methodist and Presbyterian churches, and the Salvation Army.
It called for official apologies and redress from the Government and the organisations responsible. Police were asked to establish a specialist unit dedicated to investigating and prosecuting those responsible for the abuse. Many are now dead, however.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, who called it “a dark and sorrowful day” following the report’s release, said the Government would make a formal apology on November 12.
Yesterday the Anglican Trust for Women & Children (ATWC), which operated the St Mary’s home, acknowledged the Royal Commission report, and offered “heartfelt gratitude to survivors who participated”.
“We will do everything we can to support victims and avoid re-traumatisation now the report is out - we encourage any survivors of historic abuse in ATWC’s services to come forward. They will be believed and helped to find resolution,” ATWC chief executive Andrea McLeod said.
In April 2022 the Herald was in the room when Ross Bay, Bishop of Auckland for the Anglican Church, and ATWC representatives apologised in person to Wilkinson, at her Gisborne home.
Nicholas Jones is an investigative reporter at the Herald. He was a finalist for Reporter of the Year at the 2024 Voyager Media Awards, and has won numerous national media awards for his reporting and feature writing.
Glen Wright continues to deny the offending and claims the victims conspired against him.