Mary KennyIf I were to consult a psychiatrist, or a counsellor, about personal problems in my life, or associated with my family, I would do so with one expectation: that the professional shrink would keep our conversations confidential.
Yes, I understand that if I did, or planned to do something seriously illegal – if, to take an extreme example, I told the counsellor that I had joined a terrorist group and was planning to support a suicide mission – then they would be under an obligation to inform the authorities.
If the psychiatrist was writing a book, and I was prone to an unusual phobia – say, an irrational fear of clowns – I would not object if they wrote up their case-notes under the protocol of patient anonymity.
But as a general rule, I would expect confidentiality to be maintained.
So I am puzzled that Dr Ivor Browne, a distinguished psychiatrist, much liked and widely admired (and known to me personally, through his marriage to my late friend June Levine) feels free to speak publicly about the late Phyllis Hamilton, who lived with Fr Michael Cleary and bore him two sons.
Ivor has now told Niamh Horan in the Sunday Independent that Ms Hamilton subsequently had a third child “after being raped by a priest”. This child was a daughter, and was placed for adoption in America. The priest who had “blackmailed” and “threatened” Phyllis Hamilton into sexual congress, was subsequently expelled from the priesthood, said Dr Browne.
Ivor Browne was interviewed in his capacity as former therapist to both Phyllis Hamilton and Michael Cleary. And this is what perplexes me. Are therapists supposed to speak publicly about the life episodes of their clients?
Perhaps there are cases where there is an overwhelming public interest issue which over-rides the right to a private life. The initial disclosures about Michael Cleary may well have been in this bracket, especially if his offspring wanted paternity clarified.
But what public interest is served by further disclosures about the late Phyllis Hamilton’s own life? Will it bring the erring priest to justice? Unlikely, if there are no further details furnished, and the victim can no longer make a complaint to the police.
Or is it more likely to sadden the memory of the late Ms Hamilton in the eyes of her adult children? Saddening about the circumstances of her life – and by the very public exposure of details which are by definition distressing and sordid? And if the adopted American daughter – now thought to be in her twenties – is seeking out her birth parents, it can hardly be comforting to her to be informed in splash headlines that her birth was the consequence of blackmail, threat and, in effect, rape.
Confidentiality sometimes is best kept confidential.
Recollections of Fr Gleeson
I am doing some research on Fr Francis Gleeson, from Templemore in Co. Tipperary (1884-1959) who was a brave and admired chaplain in the First World War, serving with the Munster Fusiliers.
In his latter years, he was the parish priest at Meath Street in Dublin. I’ll gladly make a present of a book token to any reader who has any recollections or more biographical information about Fr Gleeson. Email me on: mary@mary-kenny.com
Of geeks and giddy-goats
As a schoolchild, I was often described as a 'giddy-goat', and it was a description that was altogether just. Our parents, elders, and educators wanted us to be striving, good children, who attended to our studies, did our homework and performed our duties diligently. A little harmless high spirits weren't off the menu, but being wild and rebellious certainly was.
And guess what? A new study carried out by the University of Virginia has found that our families, guardians and educators were – right! The serious-minded and diligent children in the study – the 'geeks', as they are now called – went on to have more stable and satisfying lives than the 'cool' kids who larked around, being giddy-goats. The study, carried out by Professor Joseph Allen and published in the Journal of Child Development concluded that young people who misbehave at the age of 12 or 13 are sometimes more popular with their peers, but a decade later more had a troubled life.
Itís not a good idea for kids to be sexually precocious, said the professor, such as kissing and snogging at the age of 12 or 13. This leads to ''superficial'' relationships and ''dead end'' jobs, because acting the fool means neglecting study.
In my schooldays, we might be told to behave properly by an authority figure 'because I say so', or 'because these are the rules'. But now those guiding the young may, instead, proclaim: ''Because the boffins at the University of Virginia have, on evidence-based research, reached that conclusion.''