False Reporting by Incompetent Social Workers

For our protection, we have used a pseudo Family name. But we, as a Family, have received no protection from the named incompetent Social Workers who are involved in Child Care and the Adoption Services in Ireland.
Our Hell with these elusive professionals is now in it's fifth year. The following letter of complaint is one of many addressed since 2003 to professional individuals in the Irish Health Boards, and in kind with the other letters, our correspondence has never been dealt with. The following script will give the reader some idea of the trauma and frustration my Family have suffered, and are suffering from these very elusive people. Signed, The innocent O'Brien Family .9-11-2007.

10th October 2006.
Mr.William Mc Allister,
General Manager.
Community Care Services,
Health Service Executive North Eastern Area,
Dublin Road,
Dundalk,
Co.Louth.



Dear Mr.Mc Allister,


We wish to make a formal complaint against Marie Lynch, Principal Social Worker, The Adoption Service, Health Service Executive, St. Mary’s Hospital, Dublin Road, Drogheda, Co. Louth.

We submit that by her actions, Ms.Lynch has intentionally caused emotional and mental suffering to the O’Brien family. And sustained by reason of her malicious reporting, improper conduct, professional negligence, (including breach of Statutory Duty) of herself, the Health Board, their servants, and / or their agents.

Furthermore, that Ms.Lynch has caused damages to the O’Brien family by her intentional infliction of Emotional and Mental Suffering and / or Harassment by herself, the Health Board, their servants and / or their agents.
Furthermore, for her damage caused to the O’ Brien family by her Misfeasance of Public Office.
Furthermore, that our rights under article 41.1.1., 41.1.2 and 40.3 have been infringed by Ms.Lynch, the Health Board their servants and / or their agents.

Furthermore, that Ms.Lynch has caused damage to the O’ Brien family by infringement of our Constitutional Rights under article 41.1.1 and 41.1.2 of the Constitution of Ireland in that she has failed to protect the O’Brien family in its constitution and authority.
Furthermore, for damages caused by Ms.Lynch to the O’Brien family for Breach of our Constitutional Rights under article 40.3 in that She and the Health Board and their servants and / or their agents, failed to respect, and to defend, and vindicate the personal rights of the O’Brien family from unjust attack, and in the case of injustice done, has failed to vindicate the life, person, good name and property rights of the O’ Brien family.
Furthermore, that Ms.Lynch has caused damages to the O’ Brien family of Libel and / or Slander.

Furthermore, that Ms.Lynch has placed, and caused a very serious and damning suspicion to be formed by the Health Board about the O’ Brien family that was Incorrect, Unfounded, and Untruthful.

Furthermore, that Ms.Lynch failed to inform Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien and / or seek our permission about her release of our adoption Assessment papers to the Waterford Health Board Enquiry.

We submit that Marie Lynch. Principal Social Worker, The Adoption Service Drogheda, with malicious intent, gave untruthful information to the Waterford Health Board Enquiry, which caused action to be taken by them against the O’Brien family which included their intentions to take our five and a half year old adopted little girl away from us, and into the care of the South Eastern Health Board. We note that you have not yet replied to any of our letters of complaint addressed to yourself and sent to your The Health Services Executive offices dated 4-11-2003. and 18-11-2003.
We also note the threatening letter from Poe Kiely Hogan Solicitors dated 22-12-2003., and their miserable failure to make any response to our reply to them on the matter dated 9-1-2004.
We refer to papers from Health Board file about us, which after great difficulty, and using The Freedom of Information Acts, we eventually secured their release. And we refer to the Social Work File. Name “Our daughter”. Released under the Freedom of Information Acts on 11th November 2004.to her parents, Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien.

There is notable concealment of information in the documentation and described as “Exemption” and “No further release” and “Release with deletions” and other, by Sinead Byrne., the Freedom of Information Officer.

This blatant retention of information and secrecy by Ms.Lynch and the Health Boards is totally unacceptable to the O’Brien family.

We wish to point out that Marie Lynch and her colleagues in The Health Services Executive. South Eastern Region, and North Eastern Region who we have approached for information, and complained to, has continually declined to communicate with us about our many complaints, and queries relating to this tragic case. We have been ignored by them for three and a half years, to date.

The files released to us under the Freedom of Information Acts show some information, but as we had expected, there are many reports missing, and many of the papers have large sections obliterated. We are forbidden to read what Ms. Lynch and her colleagues have said, and recorded about us in there papers relating to, and about our tragic case.

We submit that as we know , and they know , there are already so many incorrect , untruthful , unfair , biased , unwarranted , deceptive , misleading, damning , wrongful , corrupted , scandalous , callous , unfounded , libelous, defamatory ,malicious and twisted statements, which are contained in the small amount of Health Board records that we, with great patience and perseverance have managed to secure the release of same, and view.
And we have previously supplied Victoria Murray. Intake Social Worker of the Waterford Health Board with eighteen pages of foolscap crammed tight with material that disputes what they and Ms.Lynch and their colleagues have said and recorded on Health Board file about the O’Brien family concerning our tragic case.

The majority of this incorrect and fundamentally flawed information which we are disputing, and challenging has been recorded by Irish Health Board Social Workers.
The International Federation of Social Workers in their statement of Purpose 11th November 2005.state;

“Professional Social Workers are dedicated to service for the welfare and self fulfillment of human beings, to the development and disciplined use of scientific knowledge regarding human behavior and society. To the development of resources to meet the individual, group, national and international needs and aspirations; to the enhancement and improvement of social justice”
We submit that none of these qualities and aspirations has been present at any time in Marie Lynch, and all her colleagues who have had any input into this Waterford Health Board Enquiry into the O’Brien family.
We submit that Ms.Lynche’s arrogant, insulting and continued silence is her catastrophic and diabolical weapon of mass destruction against innocent, and kind, and loving and good living people like us. We have suffered, and are continuing to suffer this dreadful pain from her offices since 14-2-2003. And this is not a healthy condition for her victims to suffer, and live in.
We consider that it is a disgrace in the fact that we had to wait for a year and five months before we were given the small amount of information that we received on 16-11-2004. It took many telephone calls, an appeal, and seven letters addressed to The Information Office, a lot of money, and much of our time to secure the release of these few papers.
Despite our best efforts, we have been unable to secure the release of all the papers about our case. And while Ms.Lynch holds these files in secret, and against our will, and continues to use them behind our backs, we, her victims will remain highly suspicious of herself and her colleagues involved in this tragic case.
We believe that Marie Lynch exists in a cocoon of draconian secrecy that is well protected by Irish Laws, and a whole barrage of rules and regulations, sections and subsections, which effectively gives these unscrupulous, elusive people, the right to decide what they will allow to be released to their victims, retain vindicating information about their victims, and hide their catastrophic conduct, behavior and mistakes.
But Ms.Lynch offers us no right to view, or challenge what she has said about us, and our treasured daughter who we adopted in Russia as a baby in March 1999.
We believe that there is no hope and no future for people like Marie Lynch, and victims like us, if these conditions do not change.

We do not have to visit Hell to experience what it would be like, because we are already there while Ms.Lynch and her colleagues who have been, and are involved in this tragic case prey upon us. And we feel that our Hell with these dreadful people is even worse, because if we were to talk to the Devil himself, we would know of what we were dealing with, and of what to expect. And we would know the just reason why we were there. But with these elusive professional people, we do not know where we stand, or what they will do next, and we do not know the just reason as to why we have become their unsuspecting victims.

We submit that there is no justice in the content of the few Health Board file papers about this tragic case that we have seen.

We wish to see all the obliterated and refused information contained in all the Health Board files about our tragic case.
We want to learn all about what Ms.Lynch and her colleagues who are involved in this tragic case have said and recorded on Health Board file about ourselves, our circumstances, and about our treasured adopted daughter.

We submit that Ms.Lynch has used her statements about Mr. O’ Brien to further her intention to wrongfully build a case against Mr.O’Brien that may destroy him, and our family. Ms.Lynch appears to us to be blind to any possibility that Mr. O’ Brien could be an innocent man. And Ms.Lynch appears to have no intentions of giving the O’Brien family a fair and just opportunity to defend themselves against her perception of guilt, and malice against the O’Brien family, who are her innocent, unsuspecting victims.

Even the unfortunate victim of a vicious dictator will know as to why he is about to die. But we are at a loss to understand why Ms.Lynch and her colleagues involved in this tragic case have acted so callously against us, and then maintained their silence, and secrecy, in their arrogant non reply to our many requests and enquiries addressed to them on the matters.

The reporting, and statements by Marie Lynch, which were also recorded on Health Board file by Mr.Ian Smith, Social Worker and Team Leader with the Waterford Health Board, is a damning indictment against Mr. O’ Brien as a man and as a father. It is also unfavorably and maliciously directed at Mrs.O’Brien, and adversely affecting, and threatening the stability, and security of our daughters future with the O’Brien family.
Ref .000005
The Waterford Child Protection Conference records state, that Marie Lynch, Adoption Services, North Eastern Health Board had confirmed to them that “[Mr. and Mrs. O’ Brien ]” had scraped through their assessment due to concerns relating to Mr. O’ Brien’sage and Mrs.O’Brien’s lack of support/immaturity.” This undated file was signed by Victoria Murray. Intake Social Worker, and Ruth Devaney, Student Social Worker.
This is an unwarranted, untruthful, unfounded, biased, slanderous and defamatory statement against us by Marie Lynch. It is in total contradiction to the material printed in our Assessment report dated 3-11-1998. and signed by Marie Lynch, and in the four post placement reports produced by Marie Lynch and her colleagues over a period of three years, and dated 29-4-1999. and 21-2-2000. and 25-4-2001. and 15-4-2002.


“[Mr.O’ Brien’s age]”
We applied to the North Eastern Health Board Child Care Adoption & Fostering Unit on 1st May 1997. Mr. O’ Brien was then aged 49. Our application was for Inter Country Adoption Assessment because we had been informed by the Drogheda Health Board, that we had little or no chance of adopting Irish children because of their unavailability, and years of waiting lists.


We adopted our treasured and only daughter, on 5-3-1999. Mr. O’ Brien was then aged 51.


We submit that there are hundreds of happily married families, who are giving birth, and rearing children, while the children’s parents are in this age bracket. We submit that Marie Lynche’s unfavorable reference to Mr. O’ Brien’s age is based upon her unfounded, unproven, biased, incompetent opinion, and bad judgment. It gives the wrongful and misleading impression that because of Mr. O’ Brien’s age, he was unable, unfit, and an unsuitable married man to be a father to an adopted child.


“and [Mrs.O’Brien’s lack of support/immaturity]”
We submit that Marie Lynche’s use of this words “lack of support” is unfounded, unwarranted, and untruthful, and without any foundation whatsoever.
At the time of our daughter’s adoption, we received over fifty letters and cards, all indicating support and good wishes for our daughter, and her adoptive mother and father, who were now her loving and caring parents.
Mrs.O’Brien received letters and phone calls from Russia, and from the foreign adoption agency V.I.D.A. in New York. America. It was just like Christmas, and our many good and kind friends were wonderful to us. Even people that we did not know brought us presents and good wishes.
We both note that we did not receive any card from Marie Lynch or from any of her colleagues in the Irish Health Board adoption service before, during, or after our daughter’s adoption.
The only “greeting” that Mrs.O’Brien received from Marie Lynch in relation to our daughter’s adoption, was in a telephonic conversation, when Marie Lynch said to her, “How did you get the baby so quickly?”
Children grow up, and leave their homes. And there are difficulties within families which are quite common everywhere. But it is not a proven fact that children of adoptive parents are adversely affected because of this. It is not a proven fact that parents are adversely affected because of this.
Our daughter has been with her grandmother, and has met with all her extended family on both sides.
And as mature and responsible parents, we have never been affected by any extended family events. And our good, and kind, and loving parenting, has been, and is continuing to be reflected in our daughter’s stable and well balanced character, her good health, and steady progress at school.
We submit that the only lack of support that we have ever known in our lives has been clearly evident in, and originated from Marie Lynch and her colleagues in the adoption service, and the Irish Health Boards, now called The Health Services Executive, who have been involved in this tragic case.

“[Mrs. O’Brien’s “immaturity]”

We submit that in any expressed, or implied implication contained in the use of this word “immaturity” to describe Mrs.O’Brien by Marie Lynch, is a blatant, unfounded, and slanderous accusation. It is a wrongful and incorrect statement.
In consideration that this word is used to describe Mrs.O’Brien’s character by a Principal Social Worker of the Adoption Service and high ranking officer in the Irish Health Board, it would be understood to carry immense weight, based on the expected intelligent accuracy, and credible, and reliable authority of its source.

Furthermore, we submit that the use of this word “immature” by Ms.Lynch is unfounded, and wrongfully contains misleading, and demeaning implicacations against Mrs.O’Brien’s good name, and her kind, sound, sensible, and mature, and good nature.
It is used by Marie Lynch to describe a condition in Mrs. O’Brien’s character, which was not present at any time during the adoption assessment.
Furthermore, Ms.Lynch also creates an unfounded and incorrect suspicion, that there was something wrong with Mrs.O’Brien at the time of the adoption.
Mrs.O’Brien was never informed about Marie Lynch’s opinion at any time, during, or after the adoption assessment.

We submit that Marie Lynch’s reporting is untruthful. Its content, and conclusions, and misleading implications, are unwarranted, and unfounded. Her reporting and vile unproven statement, and her wrongful, biased, malicious, and incompetent judgment, and unwarranted opinion has contributed to adversely affect the outcome of The Child Protection Conference which we believe was held in the Community Care Centre, Cork Road Waterford. on 30th.January 2003.
Furthermore, despite what our little daughter has suffered at the hand of what Ms.Lynch has said and done, our treasured daughter is, and has remained, a well balanced, healthy and happy, well loved little girl.

We are at a loss to understand as to why Marie Lynch has behaved like this to Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien.
The South Eastern Health Board declined to let us have a copy of what they had said in their reporting, and assessment of our daughter. We had to suffer, and fight for the release of the Assessment report about our daughter through the Freedom of Information Commissioner. We had to wait a year and a half to view what Ms.Lynch had recorded about the O’Brien family.
Can you people even begin to understand about the suffering, fear, worry and trauma that we went through while we waited to see these reports that the Health Boards had declined to give to us.

Can you people even begin to understand what Mr. O’ Brien , who is the child's loving father had to suffer, while he waited, and waited, and waited to view these reports? And in the full knowledge that he was innocent of their vile suspicions.
And we are still waiting for the full release of all the reports which are being held in secret, and against our will, by the Health Boards.

We do not know about what other information Ms.Lynch has recorded about ourselves and our daughter. And we have seen good reason to be highly suspicious of same.

Marie Lynch has stated that “Following the approval for the adoption Mr.O’Brien was extremely abusive to Ms.Lynch personally and the North Eastern Health Board as a whole”

This statement is untruthful incorrect and vexatious. It creates the wrongful impression that Mr. O’ Brien behaved in a character of which he was not. What Ms.Lynch has stated here, has never happened.
Her statement wrongfully implies that Mr. O’ Brien is of a doubtful and rough un-controllable character. Mr.O’Brien has never ever raised his voice in Marie Lynche’s presence, or behaved in the manner described in her statement written by Mr. Smith. of the Waterford Health Board.
“[Mr.O’Brien] had wanted to adopt ,twins or a sibling group, and had come to Marie Lynches office screaming abuse at her because he was only allowed to adopt one child”

This statement is slanderous, Misleading and untruthful. What Ms.Lynch has stated here has never happened.

Furthermore, Marie Lynche’s expressed implication wrongfully implies that Mr. O’ Brien was alone with Ms.Lynch at that time in her office, and that he alone wanted to adopt twins, or a sibling group.

Mrs. O’Brien’s presence at that time in her office has been completely ignored’ and omitted by Ms.Lynch in her vile, and untruthful reporting. Both Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien were present at that time in Ms. Lynch’s office, and Both Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien had expressed jointly, in a controlled and quiet manner, of their hopes and wishes to adopt more than one child

Our treasured daughter now has to grow up on her own as an only child, without a brother and/or sister. That decision was not ours, but designed and made by Marie Lynch and her colleagues in the Adoption Board. On many occasions, our daughter has asked us “why can’t I have a brother or sister?”

Ms.Lynch stated that “Both parents would have been asked by Marie Simmons, Social Worker for a year-by-year personal history”
This statement is untruthful and misleading. It has no substance, is unwarranted, and creates a wrongful suspicion that Mr. O’ Brien deliberately concealed information about his short time spent thirty years ago in St.Josephs Kilkenny, from the adoption assessment.
We were never asked at any time, to account on a yearly basis, of our places of employment by Marie Simmons. We were asked to account for the places where we had worked. And we supplied that information to the best of our abilities.
Marie Symonds. Social Worker, and member of Ms. Lynch’s assessment team, agreed with us at that time, that it was very difficult for us to remember all the places in which we had been from the time that we had left school thirty years beforehand.


“Marie Lynch stated that the information regarding St.Josephs had clearly been withheld”
This statement is wrongful and untruthful. It is misleading, and based upon unwarranted assumption, bad judgment, and her biased, unfounded, incompetent, unproven opinion.
Regarding this statement, Mr.O’Brien has on a number of occasions given a detailed and credible and plausible explanation both verbally, and in writing to the Waterford Health Board Enquiry as far back as 14-2-2003. See our letter dated 4thNovember 2003. Ref. 000031.

Marie Lynch stated that “Assessments still depend on a degree of honesty as particularly with older adopters it is hard to check the exact career history.”
Her reference to “honesty” and “older adopters” is a scandalous indictment of her official biased opinion against us, the adoptive parents, and all other adoptive parents who trust the Health Boards to assess them for any adoption.
Marie Lynche’s perception of guilt against us is unwarranted, and unfounded and misleading. It causes us to have a suspicion, and mistrust in Ms.Lynch, and with possible ramifications against all Social Workers, and in particular, Health Board Social Workers, that adversely affects all prospective adopters, and all adoptive parents who use the Health Boards to assess them for an adoption.
Has Marie Lynch ever considered that any person may find it difficult to remember everything in detail, from a time thirty years ago?

Ref. 000032.
We understand that on 14th.January 2003. Mr.Ian Smith, Social Worker, and Team Leader, Waterford Health Board Enquiry, gave information to Ms.Lynch about the O’Brien family that was unfounded, incorrect, and untruthful. In her response, we submit that Ms.Lynch supplied Mr. Smith with damning information about the O’Brien family that was fundamentally flawed, untruthful, incorrect, and given by her with malicious intent.

We believe, that in her reply to the Waterford Health Board Enquiry, Ms.Lynch was ill prepared, and that she showed little, or no consideration for the health, and well being of the O’Brien family. And in particular, in the fact that her words fueled the Waterford Health Boards intentions to take our adopted and only daughter away from us, and into the care of the Waterford Health Board,.

We submit that Ms.Lynch showed no consideration and due regard for the trauma, and destruction that could have happened to our family, and the hurt, and irreparable damage that has been suffered by our daughter, and the O’Brien family, because of what she had said.


Marie Lynch informed Mr.Ian Smith that;
“Following the adoption there were 2 post placement interviews where the O’Brien’s were described as “un co-operative”
Wrong again. This vague and wild statement by Ms.Lynch is untruthful, incorrect and misleading.
There were 4 post placement interviews, which were followed up by 4 post placement reports, which were compiled and completed by Marie Lynche’s office in Drogheda.
All the 4 reports were translated into Russian, witnessed by a Notary Public, Apostilled by The Department of Foreign Affairs, and certified by the Russian consulate in Dublin, and forwarded via Ms.Lynch to the Irish Adoption Board and on to Russia.
We submit that we believe that copies of all these reports would have been kept by Ms.Lynch in Drogheda, and by her colleagues in the Adoption Board in Dublin.
The post placement reports were dated 29thApril 1999. and 29th February 2000. and 8th May 2001. and 18th April 2002.
All the four post placement reports were full of favorable comments about our daughter’s steady progress in the O’Brien family.
There is no reporting of any decent, or any comment about the O’Brien’s offering any lack of co-operation with Ms.Lynch, or anyone else in the Adoption Service, or the Irish Health Board.
We always co-operated with Marie Lynch, and all the Social Workers who were involved in our adoption of our treasured daughter.

Marie Lynche’s signature is on three of the reports. And one report is signed by Marie Symonds Social Worker, the Adoption Service, Drogheda.

All the 4 reports were made while we were living in Drogheda.
All 4 reports were attended to, and returned by us to Marie Lynche’s office in Drogheda by hand.

We wish to view the script that Marie Lynch has stated, describes us as “un co-operative”.
And we wish to be informed about the identity of its author.

Marie Lynch has stated “Unlike all other inter country adopters the O’Brien’s did not want to share information with other prospective adopters, which would have been considered unusual.”

This is a cruel, callous, unfounded, unwarranted, groundless, incorrect, misleading and untruthful statement about us by Marie Lynch.
In 1998. We obtained a detailed list from the Foreign Adoption Group in Shankill Co. Dublin. It listed 317 families who were connected with past, present and future adoptions. We then made many telephone calls and enquires with many of the listed people.
But in kind with the Health Board, we were faced with a mass of answering machines, broken promises, and followed up by our disappointment and a lack of interest from those we managed to make contact with. We had made contact with about nine families from the Foreign Adoption Group list.
Many times, Jo would have the buns baked, and the table set. And our little daughter would be exited and waiting for them to come. But they never turned up. Not even a phone call from any of them to explain as to why they were not coming.

Through our many phone calls, we also learned that the list was old, and out of date. Many of the listed families had withdrawn, and did not want to be contacted. There were others who had explained to us that their adopted children had grown up and they were not interested.
Mrs.O’Brien informed Marie Lynch about our efforts to make contact with these people, but she offered no help, and gave no support to us on the matter.
We were never informed about, or invited to any of the functions and meetings, and parties arranged for foreign and adopted children and their parents since we adopted our daughter.
We wrote to the Foreign Adoption Group in Shankill about our problem of contact, and we offered our help and good advice to them to remedy the problems. But in their reply, they declined our offer, and stated that they would be better without people like us.
That was a very hurtful reply from that adoption group.
We wish to see the obliterated text at the end of this page.
We submit that Ms.Lynch’s incorrect and untruthful information fed into the hands of a gang of social workers and officials in the Waterford Health Board whose miserable intentions were, to take away our most treasured and loved only adopted Russian daughter from us, her loving parents. And take our treasured daughter away from her stable, and secure, and well balanced home, and happy life, which was, and still is our child's rock of security and happiness.
At that time, our little daughter was only five and a half years of age, she had bonded with us, we were all very happy, and we had just moved into our new home in Waterford.
And true to there miserable intentions, the Waterford Health Board, in collusion with Garda Pat Duggan in immigration, and with the blessing, and approval of immigration in Dublin, and the assistance of local Ban Garda Verena Fenlon, and other State Officials invaded our home on that evening of 6th.January 2003.in search of our daughter’s papers.
There were two cars full of them.
We showed them our daughter’s valid Irish passport, which was in date. But to our horror, and disbelief, that evidence was not good enough for those enquiring and elusive state officials
.
When we found, and presented them with an old, out of date Irish Passport of our daughter, they finally left, having said that they were looking for a particular number which they found in that old, out of date passport.

They never informed us of their real reason for their devious and callous and cruel visit to our home on that evening of Little Christmas 2003.

We suspect that it was a set-up, in which Irish State Officials and agencies colluded with the Waterford Health Board to take our treasured and only daughter away from us, her trusted and loving adoptive parents, and into the care of the South Eastern Health Board. And for no good sound, or just reason.
Had they succeeded in taking our daughter into their care at that time, Marie Lynch and her colleagues involved in this tragic case would have upset and destroyed the O’Brien family for ever. We would have been devastated and heart broken.
And at their hand, our treasured and well loved adopted only daughter would have suffered the most.
Our little girl, who needed, and knew us so well, would have been torn away from the only parents who she had ever known, and trusted, and loved so much in her lifetime.
Her rock of security, trust, and confidence in our society would have been taken away from her for ever by Marie Lynch and her colleagues who were involved in this tragic case.
Her little world of everything would be destroyed and changed for ever.
Based upon our history with Ms.Lynch, and upon what we have seen in our Health Board file, we submit that the Health Board tried to take our daughter away from us for no just, or good sound reason, other than their gross professional misconduct, and incompetence, coupled with malice, and their biased, ill informed perception of guilt against their innocent and unsuspecting victims, O’Brien family.
Since that day, our daughter has had a fear of the Gardai and of Irish State officials because she believes that some day, they are going to take her away.
We have the same fear, concern, and worry from them, and yourselves, in the Irish Health Boards.


We submit that during the Waterford Health Board enquiry into this tragic case, and in addition to her reporting at the Child Protection Conference, Marie Lynch. Principal Social Worker of the Health Board’s Adoption Service Drogheda, made a number of contacts with them, and provided the Board with incorrect and false information about the O’Brien family, and in particular concerning Mr. O’ Brien, that was untruthful, violent, incredible, unsafe, unfounded and misleading. And that it was then acted upon by the Waterford Health Board, and Immigration, and the Gardai and other state officials.
We suspect that the Health Board placed false, and unsafe and untruthful information before their legal advisors about us, and that it included other information from Ms.Lynch, which was also untruthful, and unfounded which gave a wrongful and misleading impression about their circumstances surrounding our family.
We submit that this information had been designed and edited by the Health Board, and gave their unwarranted, unproven, and unchecked reason to take our daughter into their care by force, and against our will.
They arrived at our home, unannounced on that evening of Little Christmas 2003. It was a nightmare of horror for us, when we realized what these elusive Officials were intent on doing to our treasured daughter, and ourselves, if we had been unable to find our daughter’s adoption papers.
And we were greatly relieved when we found our daughters valid, and in date Irish Passport, and showed it to Garda Duggan. But we were even more shocked and surprised when Garda Duggan informed us that this information was not enough to satisfy his needs.
We had just moved into our new home, and everything was still packed in boxes. But we searched frantically again, and found an old, out of date Irish passport, which was accepted by Garda Duggan, and he excused himself by saying that it was a number that he was looking for.
Then they finally left. But it was a year and a half later when we found out how close we had come to loosing our treasured and only adopted daughter to these elusive state officials.
Their traumatic effect upon ourselves and our daughter has remained with us, and will remain with us for the rest of our lives.
For many months after that event, we had to calm our little daughter while she kept asking us “are they going to take me away?”

And we continue to suffer, while we wonder what you and your elusive colleagues involved in this tragic case may try to do again to the O’Brien family.
The O’Brien family could have been destroyed by Ms.Lynch’s vile and untruthful reporting. Our innocent five and a half year old adopted little girl was placed at risk of been taken from her home and her loving adoptive parents.
The North Eastern Health Board and The South Eastern Health Board have consistently declined to pass on any of the information to us that has generated so many questions, and caused us so much worry, pain and suffering.
We are prevented by them to view, examine and challenge what they say and record about us on their file. In their wisdom, they then choose to ignore what we say, and continue to do their worst to destroy us and our treasured only adopted daughter. We had believed that these Health Board people were supposed to help, support, and care for people like ourselves.
We have already complained and advised the Waterford Health Board about our concerns relating to Marie Lynche’s false reporting, and about her mistakes and callous reporting. But they have not made any correction to their records, and they have not made any correction to our file that that is being held by them in secret, and against our will. And they have failed miserably to enter into any form of communication with us on the matter since February 2003. to date.

“The couple came across v. well to the North Eastern Health Board.”
Mr.Ian Smith recorded on Health Board file this information from Marion Middleton. Social Worker, the Adoption Board in Dublin. But this is in total contradiction to what Marie Lynch. Principal Social Worker in the Adoption Service Drogheda has stated in her reporting to Mr. Smith on 14-1-2003. See refs. 000032. Page 44. 000033. Pages 47 to 55. 000034. Page 53.

Victoria Murray. Intake Social Worker, and Ruth Devaney, Student Social Worker, have also recorded this conflicting information on Health Board file No.000005. Pages 9 to 18.
We consider it to be a miracle, that we have survived so much, and for so long, from being victimized, and very badly treated by Marie Lynch.
Ref. 000019.
We wish to view the hidden text that is obliterated by the blanked out areas on this page.
We note that this draconian and elusive practice of obliteration, and omission of selected material contained in your Health Board records which are about us, and pertinent to this tragic case, seems to be a common practice in your Health Board procedure and protocol.

This biased, harsh and unfavorable practice of secrecy and concealment is totally unacceptable to us.

Ref. 000032.
“Marie remembered the [O’Brien’s] well.”
This statement written by Mr.Ian Smith into Health Board file and dated 14th.January 2003.is Grossly Misleading, with wrongful implications against the O’Brien family.

In consideration of the information which is written by Mr. Smith about what he has stated that Marie Lynch has said on this page, and other pages of Health Board file. We submit that it wrongfully implies that in the judgment of a high ranking officer of the Health Services Executive, namely Ms.Lynch, there was something notably unfavorable about the O’Brien family.
We submit that this misleading information written by Mr. Smith is scandalous, misleading, and untruthful, and without any foundation whatsoever.

Both of us have often wondered as to why the Principal Social Worker of the Drogheda Adoption Service, Marie Lynch, had provided the Waterford Health Board with such a vilified’ and untruthful report about, and against the O’Brien family.

We submit that having being informed by Mr.Ian Smith, Social Worker and Team Leader of vilifying information about the O’Brien family, which was untruthful, Ms. Lynch in return gave information to the Waterford Health Board Enquiry that was untruthful, and fundamentally flawed. Marie Lynch at a later date then refused to co-operate with our enquiries, while stating that “it is my practice to maintain confidentiality relating to any matters discussed concerning individual cases.”
This quotation of “confidentiality” has been for the O’Brien family, and our great, and inflicted suffering that has come from Marie Lynch and the Irish Health Boards.
We submit that in her response to the Waterford Health Board Enquiry, Ms.Lynch provided a malicious, damning, untruthful, incorrect, unfounded, misleading and vile report about the Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien.
We submit that this is another example of gross professional malpractice, misconduct, incompetence, and reckless bad behavior by a high ranking official of the Irish Health Board.
This blatant refusal to co-operate creates a just suspicion, and mistrust about these elusive state officials, in people like us, who have to suffer their arrogant silence and secrecy.
Furthermore, our previous suspicions have been shown to have been correct, in the fact that we now can see what Mr. Smith has stated that Marie Lynch has said in the Health Board files that we have fought for, and waited for nearly one and a half years to view.
Please refer to our letter to Elizabeth Martin, Information Commissioner dated 29-9-2003.
Despite all our efforts, there are files about us, retained by the Health Boards in secrecy that they still refuse to let us see.

The acknowledgment by Marie Lynch addressed to Mr. O’ Brien and dated 10th.April 2003. epitomizes Irish Health Board Policy and Procedures, and her unhelpful, uncaring and callous attitude. And her lack of concern for the health and safety of those people, and children that she is supposed to care for.

Mr. Smith states that Ms.Lynch informed him that “They only scraped through their assessment due to concerns about Mr. O’ Brien’s age and Mothers lack of support/immaturity.”


This is an unwarranted, untruthful, insulting, arrogant, slanderous, biased, and defamatory statement against us. It is untruthful, and has no love, no faith, no hope, and no kindness. It is in total contradiction to the Health Board Adoption Assessment about us, and dated 3rd November 1998.and the post placement reports which were produced by Marie Lynch and her colleagues over a period of three years, and dated 29-4-1999.and 21-2-2000.and 25-4-2001.and 15-4-2002. Marie Symonds signature is on the second Post Placement Report, and Marie Lynch has signed the other three reports.
All the reports were returned by us in person, to Marie Lynch’s office in Drogheda. See Ref. 000005. In this letter.

Our adoption assessment has clearly stated “Their commitment to an adopted child and to what is best for that child is very obvious”.

Marie Lynche’s signature is on this paper.

Ref.0000032.
“Despite concerns they were approved to adopt one child only”
This is a cruel statement originating from Ms.Lynch, and recorded on Health Board file by Mr.Ian Smith, Social Worker. We believe it to have been a heartless, ill-informed and cruel decision, and influenced by Marie Lynch, and her Health Board Adoption assessment group.
So be it. But our daughter now has to grow up as an only child. Without a brother, or sister to play with. She will never experience the family life that we had so patiently and lovingly wished for.

It was always our intention to rear a family, but it was not allowed to happen by Ms.Lynch and the elusive adoption assessment group. This is one of our saddest thoughts, when we see our treasured and only adopted daughter on her own, when there could have been two, or even three. And how sad we are, when we think about the children that we had to leave behind in Russia.
We had everything prepared and ready. But these elusive and secretive people said no.
The records of the Child Protection Conference show that “Following this approval [Mr. O’ Brien ] was extremely abusive both Ms.Lynch personally and re.N.E.H.B. as a whole.” (N.E.H.B. = North Eastern Health Board.)
This statement is untruthful incorrect and vexatious. It creates the wrongful impression that Mr. O’Brien behaved in a character of which he was not. Her statement wrongfully implies that Mr. O’ Brien is of a doubtful, and rough un-controllable character.
Mr. O’ Brien has never ever raised his voice in Marie Lynch’s presence, or behaved in the manner described in her statement written by Mr. Smith. of the Waterford Health Board Enquiry.

This statement by Marie Lynch is untruthful, and misleading. What Ms.Lynch has stated here, has never happened.
“[Mr. O’ Brien ] wanted to adopt twins or a sibling group and was remembered by Marie as coming into her office screaming abuse at her because he was only allowed to adopt only one child.”
This statement is untruthful, and misleading. “[Mr. O’Brien] had wanted to adopt ,twins or a sibling group, and had come to Marie Lynches office screaming abuse at her because he was only allowed to adopt one child”

This statement is slanderous, Misleading and untruthful. What Ms.Lynch has stated here has never happened.
Furthermore, Marie Lynch’s expressed implication wrongfully implies that Mr. O’ Brien was alone with Ms.Lynch at that time in her office, and that he alone wanted to adopt twins, or a sibling group.

Mrs.O’Brien’s. presence at that time in her office has been completely ignored’ and omitted by Ms.Lynch in her vile, and untruthful reporting. Both Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien were present at that time in Ms. Lynch’s office, and Both Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien had expressed jointly, in a controlled and quiet manner, of their hopes and wishes to adopt more that one child.

Our reason was obvious. Our good intentions were for common good, kind, natural, human and deserving purpose of raising a family.

Our treasured daughter now has to grow up on her own, as an only child, without a brother and/or sister. That decision was not ours, but designed and made by Marie Lynch and her colleagues in the Adoption Board. On many occasions, our daughter has asked us “why can’t I have a brother or sister?”

Marie Lynch informed Mr.Ian Smith. Social Worker, that “Garda checks only reveal convictions”
We believe that this information is incorrect.

Ref. 000033.
Marie Lynch informed Mr. Ian Smith that “Following their approval the O’Brien’s went to a remote orphanage in Russia where they could have adopted more children had they been allowed. This is where [our daughter] came from.”
This statement is untruthful, biased, unwarranted, incorrect, sinister, and misleading, wild and unfounded, and demeaning against Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien.

It gives the wrongful and scandalous, misleading impression, that with miserable, and devious intentions, we went, in collusion with a very unscrupulous American Adoption Agency V.I.D.A., to a “remote” orphanage in Russia, where no one could find, or check up on what we were doing.


Furthermore, in this statement by Marie Lynch, who holds the esteemed position of Principal Social Worker with the Adoption Service, and is a high ranking officer of the Irish Health Board. She implies that the Russian and American adoption agencies and authorities are of doubtful integrity, and incredible groups, and that they are of a devious nature, careless, and incompetent. And that these two countries are suspect by the Irish Health Board, and are not to be trusted with the international adoption of children.
We disagree entirely with Ms.Lynch’s statement, and we protest at her ability, and her right to lie, and about her willful intentions to defame, and destroy ourselves, and our international friends, by her false and vile, and secretive reporting.
The Drogheda Adoption Service had informed us during the assessment that we would have to manage a foreign adoption on our own, and without their help, because they said that there was no service in that area from the Irish Health Boards. They informed us “we only do assessments”. At that time, there was no foreign adoption agency in Ireland.
When we received our approval, we had already made enquiries in many countries throughout the world, which included South America, Bulgaria and Romania.
And we made contact with a long standing, and reputable adoption agency in New York, America. Called V.I.D.A., The Voice of International and Domestic Adoptions.
V.I.D.A. is a world wide adoption agency, and was one of the agencies listed in the papers that were given to us to read by the Drogheda Adoption Service of the Irish Health Board.

At that time, Marie Lynch informed us that she had never heard of the adoption agency V.I.D.A.

V.I.D.A. was meticulous in their checks on us. They even checked the pedigree and credibility of the Irish Adoption Board before they arranged with us, for the adoption of our treasured daughter.

The “remote orphanage” was situated in the suburbs of a city that is bigger than Dublin. The particular area was like what you would find in Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin. There were houses and people everywhere. We were accompanied there by a high ranking doctor who was a member of the V.I.D.A. world wide adoption organization, and we were met by highly qualified and trained staff who was kind, and helpful, and educated people.

The children there lived in a big, spacious, homely, and well run home. It was clean, warm, and had beautiful and spacious gardens.
We attended court hearings in Russia, when we were again examined and questioned by the Russian authorities about our suitability, purpose, and credibility for us to be given the responsibility by them, to adopt a child from their country.
We were thoroughly examined, and then cleared by the Russian Courts to adopt our daughter.
We were required to, and we agreed, to report the details of our daughter’s progress to the Russian authorities, and to the American adoption agency V.I.D.A. in New York. And the Drogheda Adoption Service was required by V.I.D.A. to furnish regular post placement reports to them. All these Post Placement Reports were carried out to the latter.
Mr.Ian Smith reported that “Marie said that she was v-upset by the information that I gave her re.garda investigation.”

We would like to know what information Mr. Smith gave to Ms.Lynch.

Why was Ms.Lynch very upset by what Mr. Smith had told her?

Mr. Smith states that “In relation to the concerns from the neighborhood she agreed that Mr.O’Brien would stand out and attract attention.”

This appalling statement is misleading, untruthful, biased, damning, and unfounded, and unwarranted, and defamatory against Mr. O’Brien’s integrity and good character.

It wrongfully implies that Mr.O’Brien is of a character of which he is not.
Mr. O’ Brien is a quiet, reserved, educated, intelligent, well mannered, kind, tolerant, and patient mature married man. He is faithful, unobtrusive, and keeps to himself. Mr. O’ Brien learned, and formed his good character from his parents, brothers and sisters, his extended family, and from his faith, and belief in Holy God, and His Commandments, and all those loving and kind people, and in particular his wonderful, and devoted wife, who over many years by their good example and patience, and grace, and good sound advice, have given Mr.O’Brien the world of opportunity, to form his well balanced, charitable, stable, patient, kind and good character.
We submit that what Marie Lynch has said about Mr. O’ Brien, and entered into Health Board file by Mr. Smith, are her callous, heartless, vindictive, malicious and wrongful ill-treatment of Mr. O’ Brien, as a man, as a person, and as an adoptive father.
This is yet another untruthful example of the insulting innuendo originating from the Principal Social Worker, Marie Lynch.

We would like to know the nature and content of these concerns?
We would like to know who in the neighborhood has brought about these concerns by the Health Board.
Mr. Smith records that Marie Lynch stated “Following the adoption there were two post placement interviews.”
Wrong again. This vague and wild statement by Ms.Lynch is untruthful, incorrect and misleading.
There were 4 post placement interviews, which were followed up by 4 post placement reports, which were compiled and completed by Marie Lynche’s office in Drogheda.

All the 4 reports were translated into Russian, witnessed by a Notary Public, Apostilled by The Department of Foreign Affairs, and certified by the Russian consulate in Dublin, and forwarded via Ms.Lynch to the Irish Adoption Board and on to Russia.
We submit that we believe that copies of all these reports would have been kept by Ms.Lynch in Drogheda, and by her colleagues in the Adoption Board in Dublin.
The post placement reports were dated 29thApril 1999. and 29th February 2000. and 8th May 2001. and 18th April 2002.

All the four post placement reports were full of favorable comments about our daughter, and her steady progress in the O’Brien family.
There is no reporting of any decent, or any comment about the O’Brien’s offering any lack of co-operation with Ms.Lynch, or anyone else in the Adoption Service, or the Irish Health Board.
We always co-operated with Marie Lynch, and all the Social Workers who were involved in our adoption of our treasured daughter.

Marie Lynche’s signature is on three of the reports. And one report is signed by Marie Symonds Social Worker, the Adoption Service, Drogheda.

All the 4 post placement reports were made while we were living in Drogheda.
All 4 reports were attended to, and returned by us to Marie Lynche’s office in Drogheda by hand.
We wish to view the script that Marie Lynch has stated, describes us as “un co-operative”.
And we wish to be informed about the identity of its author.
.
Mr. Smith records “They were surprised when the [O’Brien’s] moved to Ferrybank”
This is a misleading, devious, sinister, unwarranted, unfounded, and incorrect statement originating from Ms.Lynch.

During the four post placement interviews, we had openly discussed with the Adoption Assessment team about our hopes, and good intentions of moving to a bigger home, a better place to live, and in particular, of our plans for the rearing of our treasured and only adopted daughter, in a safe place, where she would grow up with every good chance of success.

The four post placement interviews were conducted by Marie Lynch and Marie Symonds at our home in Drogheda over a period of three years. And for the latter two years, there had been a for-sale sign placed in the front garden at the entrance to our home in Drogheda. This was in full view of Marie Lynch and her colleagues of the adoption assessment team who, from time to time, came to visit us, and, while they conducted the post placement reports.

We had informed Marie Lynch of our intentions to move long before we had sold our home in Drogheda, and long before we moved to Ferrybank in Waterford City. We informed Ms.Lynch of our new address before and then again after we had moved from Drogheda.

Our intended move was also recorded in the post placement report dated 15-4-2002. Our time of the move and our new address is printed in this report. This report had been signed by Marie Lynch. Principal Social Worker.

When we found out that there had been concern about our move to Waterford City, we immediately supplied Victoria Murray, Social Worker with the Waterford Health Board Enquiry, with a list of twenty five credible and good sound reasons as to why we had moved from Drogheda to Waterford City.
Mr.O’Brien had retired from work, and we were simply looking for a bigger house, and a better place to live. This fact has been clearly stated in the post placement report compiled by the Ms. Lynch’s Health Board adoption team, and signed by Marie Lynch. Principal Social Worker. Adoption Service Drogheda.


We would like to know why Marie Lynch refers to our move as being to Ferrybank.

We submit that given the unfavorable implications that have been, and are ever present in the Health Board Enquiry against the O’Brien family, and in particular, against Mr.O’Brien. That it can easily be misunderstood from her statement, that Ferrybank was an isolated place in the back of nowhere, and where the O’Brien’s and their adopted, and vulnerable daughter would live unnoticed , and unobserved by the public.
Ferrybank is a densely populated area, and is part of Waterford City. We can walk, at our ease, from our home, which is in an estate of houses. And be in the centre of Waterford City in twenty minutes.
Why were they surprised, when we moved to Ferrybank in Waterford City?
On what basis did they make this statement?

On 8-5-2001. We also informed Marie Symonds, Social Worker of the Health Board Adoption assessment team Drogheda, about our plans to move home. She had also seen the for-sale sign which was clearly visible at the front of our house, and had been there for two years. She had informed us that we could continue with the Post Placement reports in whatever Health Board area that we moved to. We agreed with her to do this, but we did not move home until after the last Post Placement report which occurred a year later in 2002

Furthermore, the last Post Placement Report dated 18-4-2002. shows that we had informed another Social Worker, Aisling O’Leary, and that we had provided the Drogheda Health Board with our new address. And the final report was signed by Marie Lynch. Principal Social Worker.



Mr. Smith records that “They were last seen just before they left Drogheda.”
This statement originating from Marie Lynch is incorrect, devious, unfounded, misleading, and untruthful.
Both Mr. and Mr.O’Brien and our treasured daughter have visited our friends in Drogheda on many occasions since our move to Waterford City.
In the latter part of May 2002.,and after we had moved from Drogheda to Ferrybank in Waterford City, and while on one of our many visits to our friends in Drogheda, Mr. O’ Brien called in person to Marie Lynche’s Health Board building in St.Mary’s Hospital. Dublin Road. Drogheda.
While there, he had an amicable conversation with the receptionist, and he handed in the completed 4th post placement report dated 18-4-2002.

Mr. Smith reports that “Unlike all the other inter-country adopters the O’[Brien’s] did not want to share info with other prospective adopters. (This was asked of them)”
This information originating from Ms.Lynch is a scandalous statement. It is untruthful, misleading, incorrect, unfounded, and without any substance whatsoever.
Based upon untruthful and unfounded innuendo, it gives the wrongful impression that Mr. and Mrs. O’Brien did not wish to share, or make any contact with any other prospective adopters about their adoption.
We submit that Marie Lynch’s words and implications contained therein are entirely untruthful.
Mr. Ian Smith reports that “Marie said that she was very u-upset by the information that I gave her re garda investigation.”
On 14-1-2003. What information did Mr. Smith give to Ms.Lynch about the Garda Investigation?
We would like to know why Ms.Lynch was very upset.
Mr. Smith records that “Marie said that she would send reports for the case conference if a separate request were to be made in writing.”
We wish to see a copy of this request.
What reports were sent by Ms.Lynch to the Waterford Health Board Case Conference?
Ref. 000034.
Mr.Ian Smith records that Marie Lynch said, “that parents should usually be informed of this but if we outlined the circumstances in this case that could be wavered; i.e. parents (or Mr.O’[Brien] at least) had withheld information from the adoption process and parents appear to have no attachments to current area and would therefore leave if concerns were raised re.[our daughter]”.
We wish to see these reports.
This is another example of unfounded Health Board Perception of guilt against their unsuspecting victims. In this instance Marie Lynch cites withheld information, and the risk of flight, as reason to act against the O’Brien family in secrecy.
Firstly, the Health Board states an element of deception that Mr. O’ Brien withheld information from the adoption assessment about his time spent working in St.Josephs Kilkenny.
This statement is untruthful, groundless, and misleading. Mr.O’Brien had forgotten about his short time spent while working in St.Josephs Kilkenny.
Secondly , the Health Board state that Mr. O’ Brien deliberately concealed the information about the Garda Enquiry into allegations made against him by some men who had lived in St.Josephs about thirty years ago..
This statement is untruthful and misleading, and without any foundation whatsoever.
Mr. O’ Brien was not informed about the Garda Enquiry until 8th November 2002. The assessment was concluded in November 1998. This was four years after the adoption assessment.
Thirdly, Marie Lynch informed Mr. Smith of the Waterford Health Board Enquiry that “parents appear to have no attachments to current area and would therefore leave if concerns are raised re. [our daughter]”

This statement from Ms.Lynch is unwarranted and unfounded, and places a suspicion of mistrust and guilt upon Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien.
We submit that it is quite common for families to move home in Ireland. We maintained contact with our friends that we had left behind in Drogheda. And we still visit them. All of us made new and trusted friendships upon our arrival in Waterford City., and Co. Kilkenny. We made friends with almost every family in our estate. Our daughter made fifteen good friends at her school and seven good friends of her own age on our road.

Shortly after our arrival, Mr. O’ Brien joined The Waterford and Suir Valley Railway Company, and was trained as a train driver with them. He also joined the board committee and became actively involved in the operation of the railway line. We were well attached to Waterford with our home, established friendships, our daughter’s school, our new bank accounts, Social Welfare pension payments, new family doctors, family dentist, and much more.

We were very happy to come and live in Waterford City. For the first time in our lives we had a detached home of our own. Our bank accounts were low, because we had spent all our money on our new home and expenses. But we were happy and content.

You secretive people gave us no chance to make any reply to your horrendous suspicions about the O’Brien family during your Health Board Enquiry. And we are still waiting for your reply, and an opportunity to challenge what you have said and done to us since January 2003.


We can assure you people, that no matter what you may have said, or done to us at that time ,or at any time in the future, we would never run away, and in particular, from people like you ,or any one else who have been involved in this tragic case.



We wish to view a copy of the letter which “outlined the circumstances” by Mr. Smith, and was addressed and sent to Marie Lynch.

We would like to know the reason as to why Marie Lynch declined to inform us about this event.
We submit that Marie Lynch, Principal Social Worker Adoption Service Drogheda has provided the Waterford Health Board with information about Mr.O’Brien that is fundamentally flawed, wrongful, misleading, biased, and of twisted witch-hunt material, as being un-disputed, factual, and truthful.

And we submit that Marie Lynch has done this with malicious intention.

We would like to know why did Ms.Lynch not make any contact with Mr. and Mrs.O’Brien about the matters?

Why we were then, and now denied any right of reply and challenge?

We submit that this information was placed on Health Board file and acted on by them to further their case against Mr. O’ Brien.

We submit that the Health Board had made no proper checks into its credibility, or into the circumstances under which it had been made.

Could it be, that once the Health Services Executive North Eastern Region and South Eastern Region, and in particular, their Social Workers, who have been, and are involved in this tragic case, form a perception of guilt against their unsuspecting innocent victims, then no common intelligence, and sound, and just reason, prevails in their minds while they conduct their enquiries?

Mr.Ian Smith. Social Worker with the Waterford Enquiry has used Ms. Lynches reporting to implicate Mr.O’Brien while stating;
“This corroborated in terms of his bullying behavior by N.E.H.B.”
We submit that this statement given by Mr. Smith is untruthful, vile, slanderous, unfounded, incorrect and misleading. It gives the wrongful impression that Mr. O’ Brien is a bully, is abusive, and is of a doubtful and unfavorable character.
Please be advised that the O’Brien family is actively pursuing all those who have caused us so much damage, hurt and grief in connection with this tragic case.
Mr.O’Brien is actively pursuing the three men from St.Josephs Kilkenny, for making false allegations of child sexual abuse against him, and for Deformation and Slander.

Mr.O’Brien has written seven letters of formal complaint addressed to the Kilkenny Gardai. And Gardai, Solicitors, Barristers, and a Redress Board Judge are adversely implicated in these letters of complaint.

Mr.O’Brien has made a formal complaint to the Waterford Gardai against Dr. Betty Morrissey Walsh Medical Director Community Child Care Centre Waterford Regional Hospital for Neglect of Duty, Devious behavior, and her reckless, groundless, unfounded, damning, and untruthful statement signed by her, which stated, “There was concern that [our daughter] may have been engaged in sexual contact by her father”.

Mr.O’Brien has also made Similar complaints about Dr.Walsh to the Medical Council, and to the Health Services Executive South Eastern Region.

In response to another complaint by Mr.O’Brien to the Garda Complaints Board in Dublin, Garda Sergeant Liam Maher and Garda John Bergin and Superintendent Gordon Ryan of Kilkenny Garda station are at present the subject of an internal Garda Enquiry for Improper Conduct by Neglect of Duty in the fact of their failure over a reasonable length of time to respond to Mr. O’Brien’s enquiries for information pertinent to the Waterford Health Board Enquiry into the O’Brien family.

As a result of another formal complaint by Mr.O’Brien to the Garda Complaints Board, Garda Sergeant Michael Kelly and Garda Superintendent Fergus Doggett and Garda Superintendent G. P. Smith of Drogheda Garda Station are the subject of an internal Garda Enquiry for Improper Conduct by Neglect of Duty in the fact of their failure over a reasonable length of time to respond to enquiries by Mr.O’Brien for information pertinent to the Waterford Health Board Enquiry into the O’Brien family in 2003.

These elusive professional people, in kind with Marie Lynch and her colleagues that are, and have been involved in this tragic case, have consistently declined to communicate with the O’Brien family, despite our efforts to communicate with them.

Ms.Lynche’s arrogant Health Board Silence and Secrecy, has been, and remains for the O’Brien family, a significant cause of our Suffering, Frustration, Suspicion, and Mistrust in Social Workers, and all those connected with this tragic case.
Neither Mr.O’Brien and Mrs.O’Brien and our treasured Daughter will ever accept her vile and arrogant treatment of the O’Brien family.

We are at a loss to understand as to how highly intelligent, professional and qualified people can work and operate in a system of secrecy that is fundamentally flawed.
It might be considered that Marie Lynch and her colleagues who are involved in this tragic case may claim that she is right when she may claim to have a good reason to form a suspicion of guilt against her unsuspecting victims.

But we submit that Ms. Lynch did not have any good or just reason other than her professional incompetence, and a malicious intent to destroy the O’Brien family.
While knowing from our experience about Ms. Lynch’s miserable track record with the O’Brien family, we consider, that based upon the Health Board Contract of Employment, and Legal Duty to enquire, and its secrecy, and Balance of Probabilities, when Marie Lynch is wrong, she will resort to her deplorable Silence, Secrecy and Confidentiality, and she will expect to get away with it.
Furthermore, we submit that Social Workers like Marie Lynch are so well protected by their terms and conditions of employment, and by Irish State Law, that not even a well known Detective agency, International Investigations Ireland, would be prepared to investigate these elusive Irish Health Board officials, because of their entitlement to secrecy and confidentiality.
We submit that this miserable secrecy, and confidentiality, allows you people who have been, and are connected with this tragic case, to say, and do what you like, to your unsuspecting innocent victims.

It allows you to ignore any challenge made against you by your unsuspecting innocent victims. In our tragic case, you people have chosen to ignore all our letters, and challenges made to your offices since 2003 to date.

We are now Three and a Half long years waiting, and suffering from Marie Lynch’s arrogant silence.


We submit that when you are wrong, we suffer, and we have no right of reply, and we are left by you people to rot from your perception of guilt, and our mistrust in you.

We submit that your system is unsafe, and fundamentally flawed, and that as long as your draconian conditions continue to exist, no citizen of Ireland is safe from the Marie Lynch’s of this world.


Ms.Lynch and her colleagues involved in this tragic case have caused us unbelievable grief and suffering, while she exercised her right by virtue of her employment and legal duty to falsely deliberate against the O’Brien family.


We submit that in our experience with you people, your declared contract of employment, and your declared legal duty, gives you the right to lie, create false records, destroy innocent people, decline to communicate with your victims, conceal vindicating information, be elusive, be corrupt, behave badly, be unbelieving and deceitful, menacing, unfair, threatening, callous, vindictive, biased, be self-righteous, un-cooperative, and operate like a gang of well organized twisters against their unsuspecting victims.

But Ms.Lynch has always denied us the right to defend ourselves, because she and her colleagues involved in this tragic case have never shown us what they have said and recorded on Health Board and Adoption Board file.

We understand that these Social Workers and Health Board Officials are supposed to help people like ourselves, but in our tragic case, Ms.Lynch and the Irish Health Board have done the direct opposite, and continue to do so.

We are asking you to confirm or deny the contents of this complaint within ten calendar days from the date of this letter.
Failure to confirm or deny the contents of same will constitute an agreement that the information contained therein is accurate.
We look forward to your reply,

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Mr.O’Brien. Mrs.O’Brien.