- the identification programme is only open to members of the public who believe that they may be the parent, child, sibling or half-sibling of the deceased children and can prove that they have reasonable grounds to believe so. Thus the project aims to identify a subset of the children rather than all of them.
- it does not apply to burial sites where the last burial occurred before 1950
- there is no mention of genetic genealogy within the proposed legislation
- members of the public were invited to make Submissions regarding the proposed law by Friday 24th Jan 2020.
I explored the proposed legislation further in this previous blog post. And below is the text of the submission I made in regard to the proposals. Unfortunately due to the dissolution of the Dáil (the Irish parliament), the submission process has stalled. The new government may restart it. Here is the text of an email I received in response to my submission:
I wish to advise that the Joint Committee ceased to exist upon the dissolution of the Dáil on 14 January 2020 and, therefore, that the pre-legislative scrutiny process on the general scheme is halted. It is open to the new Administration to restart or not restart the process, or introduce a new scheme, but the current consultation process is closed.
INTRODUCTION
1. My name is Dr Maurice Gleeson and I am both a medical doctor (psychiatrist, pharmaceutical physician) and a genetic genealogist. This is a personal submission and is not made on behalf of any organization.
2. I run a variety of DNA projects researching specific surnames, I lecture widely on genetic genealogy, and I am known for my educational YouTube videos on genetic genealogy. I was voted "Genetic Genealogist of the Year 2015” (SurnameDNA Journal) and “Superstar / Rockstar Genealogist, Ireland” in 2016 and 2017 (Canada’s Anglo-Celtic Connections). I am Education Ambassador for the International Society of Genetic Genealogy, a member of the Association of Professional Genealogists, and organizer of Genetic Genealogy Ireland, a 2-3 day conference on DNA & genealogy held both in Dublin (since 2013) and more recently in Belfast (since 2018).
3. I have particular expertise in the use of DNA tests from Direct-to-Consumer DNA companies (e.g. Ancestry, 23andMe, MyHeritage, FamilyTreeDNA) to identify persons with unknown ancestry (specifically adoptees, foundlings and illegitimate individuals). My clients are frequently referred by TUSLA or Barnardos.
4. Since 2018, the same techniques used with adoptees & foundlings have been used successfully to identify serial killers, rapists and unidentified human remains in the US and elsewhere. They can also potentially be used to identify unidentified human remains in Ireland and specifically those of the children buried in the disused pit on the site of the former Mother & Baby Home at Tuam.
5. My comments below relate primarily to the situation at Tuam and how the proposed legislation will impact upon it. 6.
THE NEED TO IDENTIFY ALL THE CHILDREN AT TUAM
7. The wording of the current draft legislation implies that only a subset of the children buried in the disused pit at Tuam will be identified, namely those from whom a reasonable DNA Profile can be obtained and who match the DNA Profile of specific family members (parent, child, sibling or half-sibling) who have come forward to ne tested.
8. However, in many cases immediate family will be dead or non-existent. This significantly restricts the number of identifications that can be made.
9. Families of those children that can be identified will be informed of the identification and will be offered the opportunity to dispose of the remains of the child in question as they wish. This may involve burial in a family plot or in a specific area of a graveyard reserved for such burials.
10. Nowhere does the proposed legislation discuss what happens to the children’s remains that cannot be identified (e.g. no DNA Profile obtained). Or what happens to the ones who can potentially be identified (e.g. excellent DNA Profile) but for whom no family has come forward. If these remaining children were to be buried in unmarked graves, then this has significant potential implications under both Common Law and the Irish Constitution.
11. Under Common Law, all Irish citizens have the right to a decent burial (Shannon p24). Furthermore, the Constitution emphasizes the importance of dignity, and in particular dignity in death. Failure to afford dignity to a deceased person could constitute a breach of the Constitution (Shannon p22).
12. There is copious evidence of the systematic abuse of children within Ireland’s institutions (e.g. the Ryan Report), including the Tuam Home. The full extent of these abuses will become apparent when the Mother and Baby Homes Commission of Investigation publishes its final report. However, the picture that emerges is one where children were effectively abandoned by their families, discarded by society, subjected to physical, sexual & emotional abuse, and (as with Tuam) when they died, they were not given a decent burial. Society tried to hide them away - they were an embarrassment - something to be swept under the carpet.
13. And therefore, the re-interment of some of the Tuam children in unmarked graves would be seen by many as a continuation of this systematic pattern of abuse that attempts to make the problem disappear and thus robs the child of dignity.
14. Furthermore, a clear message must be sent to present and future generations, on behalf of the children who died at Tuam, that child abuse will not be tolerated, that the dignity of the child must be respected, that the mistakes of the past will not be repeated. This is not just a message for Ireland, it is a message for the entire World. Child abuse remains a major problem in Ireland and worldwide.
15. Under these circumstances, each and every child at Tuam must be identified and buried in an individual grave with their name on the gravestone. Anything less than this will be seen as a continuation of the denial of dignity that they experienced in life and will fall short of the necessary redress that the situation demands.
16. Merely having their names on a memorial plaque would further add to the indignity they have already suffered and could be seen as an attempt to once again hide them away and sweep the problem under the carpet.
17. The children at Tuam are symbolic of the institutional abuse that plagued Ireland for many years. It is fitting that their names are remembered, not just on a memorial plaque, but on personalized gravestones marking where their remains finally rest in peace. Such individualized gravestones make the symbolic statement “I was here” and allows them to make a stand for dignity in death. And we must be their advocates.
18. As a result, the wording of the proposed legislation will need to be adapted to reflect the desire to identify all of the children in the mass grave and not just a specific subset.
THE NEED FOR GENETIC GENEALOGY
19. Standard forensic testing will employ autosomal STR analysis and useful comparisons are limited to parent, child, sibling or half-sibling of the target individual. However, because many such family members will be dead or non-existent, only a small proportion of identifications are likely to be made using these techniques.
20. In order to optimize the chances of identifying all the children at Tuam, genetic genealogy techniques will have to be used. Standard Genetic Genealogy techniques (e.g. using autosomal SNP tests) have helped adoptees reconnect with their birth families for over 10 years (Gleeson 2019). The success rate with these techniques in the US was surprisingly high, even back in 2017 when the database sizes were much smaller than they are now. At that stage, 50% of adoptees who had tested (n=700) had identified a parent or sibling (Bettinger 2017).
21. Since 2018, the methodology has been used to identify cold cases and assist active investigations in the US (Greytak 2019). The marked success of these techniques has made newspaper headlines, most famously in the Golden State Killer case. The FBI has set up a dedicated unit to deal with this new science of Investigative Genetic Genealogy.
22. The application of these techniques is currently being investigated in other countries, including the UK, Canada, Australia and Sweden. In 2019, I was involved in a study that demonstrated that these techniques can work successfully in a UK setting (Thomson 2019).
23. There are currently two databases that allow comparisons of forensic samples – the FamilyTreeDNA database and the Gedmatch database. Each has approximately 2 million participants, a sizeable proportion of which have Irish ancestry. All participants have undertaken an autosomal SNP test. This commercial Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) test assesses over 600,000 DNA markers on the human genome. In comparison, the standard forensic autosomal STR tests only assesses 17 markers. Thus the commercial test has a much greater potential to detect relatives than the standard forensic test.
24. Consequently, standard Genetic Genealogy techniques can help identify the target individual using much more distant relatives, such as 2nd, 3rd or even 4th cousins. Thus, the range of possible family members permitted to be included in the comparison database will have to be extended to at least 2nd cousins, preferably further, and thus the wording in the legislation will need to be adapted to reflect this.
25. The use of Genetic Genealogy techniques could be incorporated into a staged approach. In the first instance, standard forensic tests (autosomal STR, Y-STR, mtDNA) could be used as a 1st-line approach (on both the children’s remains and the family members who come forward). This will hopefully identify some of the unidentified human remains.
26. Subsequently, Genetic Genealogy tests (autosomal SNP) could be performed on any remaining DNA samples from the children’s remains and compared against other autosomal SNP results either in the DNA (Historic Remains) Database or in commercial databases such as FamilyTreeDNA and Gedmatch (almost 4 million people in total).
27. Alternatively, if there is a limited amount of tissue sample from the children’s remains, standard forensic tests could be put aside and Genetic Genealogy tests could be performed from the start (i.e. as a 1st-line approach).
28. Or alternatively, the sample could be conserved for future analysis until such time as the technology improves and allows a good chance of a reasonable DNA Profile being obtained from a small sample.
29. Technology is advancing rapidly, and the Agency appointed to manage a mass grave situation needs to keep abreast of these developments. Whole Genome Sequencing and microarray chip developments may significantly impact the feasibility of obtaining reasonable DNA Profiles for comparison purposes and their suitability for implementation should be continuously assessed.
30. More people join the commercial databases all the time, and thus the size of these databases will continuously enlarge. This increases the chances of a successful identification. Therefore, any DNA Profiles and associated tissue samples of unidentified children should be retained (and not destroyed) so that future comparisons against the DTC databases can be made.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Amend the wording of the proposed legislation to emphasise that attempts will be made to identify all children in mass grave situations and not just those of families who come forward.
2. Amend the proposed legislation to specifically allow the use of Genetic Genealogy techniques where appropriate, including as part of the Pilot Programme.
3. Expand the range of family members permitted to be included in the DNA (Historic Remains) Database to include at least 2nd cousins.
4. Any DNA profiles of children that remain unidentified after comparison with the DNA (Historic Remains) Database should be securely compared to the FamilyTreeDNA & Gedmatch databases and standard Genetic Genealogy techniques applied to identify them.
5. As more people join the commercial databases all the time, any DNA Profiles and associated tissue samples of unidentified children should be retained (and not destroyed) so that future comparisons against the DTC databases can be made.
Maurice Gleeson
24th Jan 2020
24th Jan 2020
Well done. I hope that the proposed legislation is modified to include all children remains and the recommendations you have made.
ReplyDeleteExcellent, this just has to be done properly.
ReplyDelete