DISTANCE MOTHER TRUDY: 'IT WAS ONLY: GIVE UP, GIVE UP, GIVE UP'

The great sadness of against you wants to have to give up your child, because of the 'shame'.

Becoming a mother without being married was often considered a sin in the 50s, 60s and 70s. That is why thousands of women at that time had to give up their babies for adoption immediately after birth, against their will.

One of those 'remote mothers' is Trudy Scheele-Gertsen (75), who, together with women's rights organization Bureau Clara Wichmann, filed a lawsuit against the Dutch State because of these abuses.

“There are women who have had to give birth blindfolded with washcloths or a sheet over their eyes or even with a pillowcase over their heads, after which they had to give up their child.”

The story of distance mother Trudy

At the beginning of July 1967, Trudy Scheele became pregnant by her then boyfriend. “I was almost done with my nursing education. I thought I could just finish it and after that I would take care of our child with my partner. That happened very often at the time. One in five marriages was actually a forced marriage because the woman was pregnant.” But Trudy's boyfriend turned out to have another girl at the same time, who was also pregnant. "Marriage to him couldn't go through and I broke up because I didn't want a man I couldn't trust."

'IT WAS A SHAME, YOU HAD COMMITTED A MORTAL SIN'

In addition, Trudy had another problem: completing her education without the headmistress finding out that she was pregnant. “I wouldn't be the only one or the first to be allowed to pack his briefcase and be put on the curb if it got out. It was a shame, you had committed a mortal sin. Especially in the Catholic hospital where the nuns were in charge.” Trudy managed to keep it a secret and graduate in October. “But then I entered the next phase: I had to return home after completing my education. My mother had already noticed a bit and decided that I should give up the child, because my parents could not bear the shame.”

Sent to the Paul Foundation

“My mother's dream for her daughter's future was shattered,” Trudy recalls. “She thought that giving up the child was the best option for me, but I didn't feel that way at all. I didn't want to think about it, got sick at the thought. All this time I had prepared myself to take care of my child myself.”

Trudy still had three months to go before giving birth when her mother sent her to the Paulastichting in Oosterbeek, a Catholic home for unmarried mothers. “I had no choice but to go. I was not allowed to stay at home and it was difficult for me to find another place to stay in that short period of time.”

No information or awareness of her rights

Only 50 years later Trudy found out through letters that her mother had arranged behind her back that she would give up her child. “So I could scream and say I wanted to keep my child, but those nuns wouldn't listen anyway. They did what my mother said. That is also the reason that I did not receive any cooperation there to keep the child myself. It was just: give up, give up, give up.

That made me very anxious. I didn't really understand my own situation and didn't know what my rights were. There was no information about it at all. Really outrageous. My file even stated that they should not talk to me about money. Then I might get the idea to intervene at that moment. But I had absolutely no idea that my mother was behind it.”

When Trudy gave birth in February 1968, she was still being talked about that she couldn't take care of her baby herself. “I couldn't stay with the Paula Foundation after the birth either. I had to leave and I couldn't take my baby Willem-Jan with me. I had no place to stay and no job.” Immediately after the birth, Trudy's baby was taken away. “I got to see him one more time for a very short time and that was it.”

Permanently removed from custody

Trudy decided to work very hard in the months that followed to get a place to live and find a job in order to get her child back. She managed to find shelter as a registered nurse and with a good salary she was able to support her child. But the Child Protection Board didn't think that was a good idea.

“Later in the papers I found that they had asked the adoption committee for advice, while adoption was not an issue for me at all. Then a message was sent to the judge to urgently remove me from custody.

I was already banned for a year, but if you are permanently removed from custody, it is almost impossible to get your child back after that. During that period, a social worker told the judge that I had given permission for this, while that was not true at all. Without asking me anything or seeing me, the judge then put his signature and stamp underneath. And so I lost my child.”

Missing mother

Trudy thinks the worst is that her son suffered a lot when he was about four months old. “He was malnourished, was behind in his development and suffered from homesickness and lack of mother. That was according to the psychologist's report. That's when I collapsed.”

Would you like to read more from Margriet, the magazine brand for women who want to age happily and healthily? Go to Margriet.nl .

.