Sister Frances Dominica Ritchie
Sister Dominica is a 73 year old Nun from the Anglican order of ‘All Saints Sisters of the Poor‘. She eventually became Mother Superior of the order.
Her younger brother, David, was born with only one lung, and she spent many years visiting him in Great Ormond Street Hospital – a family tragedy which led her to make nursing her vocation.
She did so in exemplary fashion; a chance meeting with the parents of a young girl called Helen who was dying.
“I saw what a strain it was – looking after her – and after a while I asked if they would trust me to look after her,” she said.
“So she used to come and stay in the convent for two or three nights at a time. Then I started to think about how other families coped.”
Sister Dominica didn’t just ‘think’ – she acted. She gathered a group of like-minded people and they began fundraising for a ‘hospice’. Helen House, for young children, opened in 1982 and in 2004 she opened Douglas House, for teenagers.
Unsurprisingly, she was feted for this work. In 2006 she was awarded the OBE for services to healthcare, in 2007, declared ‘Woman of the Year’, 2012 she was given a ‘Lifetime Achievement Award’ by the Hospice movement.
Despite never having married, in 1989, working in a hospital in Ghana, she became aware of an 11 month old boy, Kojo, who was close to death through malnutrition. Sister Dominica nursed him back to health and later adopted him, bringing him back to England to live with her. The other Nuns in the order were less than impressed with this, and Sister Dominica was forced to stand down as Mother Superior, although she remained with the order. Indeed, the community provided her with a house where she lives with Kojo to this day, adjacent to the hospice and ‘new’ convent, but not actually in the grounds.
Kojo is today a 28 year old man – and it might be said, the ‘cross in life’ that Sister Dominica has to bear. It is a cross she has born with dignity and compassion, supporting him without condoning his actions.
‘His actions’ almost defy description. To date he has 38 horrific convictions. He claims that the 11 months before Sister Dominica adopted him are the cause of all his troubles. ‘Troubles’ which include stabbing a man with a machete – officers later found three swords, a machete and six other knives in his home; later attacking Sister Dominica herself, and culminating in a three year sentence for kidnapping another Nun who he also physically assaulted.
It is a remarkable story – but it took an even more bizarre turn.
In 2013, Sister Dominica was the subject of two historic sexual abuse allegations made by two separate women. Neither involved children, nor even young adults, nor had any connection with the Hospice movement that she had founded.
Sister Dominica was arrested and the allegations investigated by the Police.
“Thames Valley Police received allegations of indecent assault which took place in Oxford in the 1970s.
“The offences were reported to police in July 2013 by a third party and subsequent investigation identified two female victims.
“A 71-year-old woman was arrested in connection with the investigation in November 2013, on suspicion of indecent assault on a woman over 16 years of age.
“A decision was made by the Crown Prosecution Service not to charge her and she was released in July 2014. There is currently no live investigation ongoing.”
So, allegations laid by a third party, investigated, no charges and no further investigation. You might think that was the end of the matter?
Not at all, for the Trustees of the Charitable Foundation that Sister Dominica founded, carried out their own investigation – and ‘notwithstanding that no conclusions about the allegations could be made‘, decided that Sister Dominica was not to be physically allowed back into either of the Hospices.
Now matters may be slightly complicated by the fact that a year earlier, the good sisters had given up their convent on St Mary’s Road, Oxford, and the ‘order of Conventual Catholic friars’ had moved into the vacant house. The Friars are also helping out at Helen House and Douglas House…
This means that the good sisters, now elderly and fewer in number, are living in a smaller house in the grounds of Helen House (minus Sister Dominica of course) – they have a phone number, but they neither answer the phone, nor return messages. Helen House has ‘no idea’ where they might be…
The temporary Bishop of Oxford, Colin Dorchester, doesn’t want to say, nor even talk to me about Sister Dominica. Various church dignitaries gave me the run around all morning – but I did finally speak to a very senior church figure who I am not going to name, out of respect for his courage in being the only person who was prepared to speak on the subject of Sister Dominca.
It is a desperately sad situation.
Without giving away any details of the independent safeguarding risk assessment that was carried out, you can imagine that a small group of elderly nuns in charge of desperately sick children are not enamoured of a man given to kidnapping them, nor threatening people with machetes.
You can also imagine that a profoundly committed Christian woman, having made an undertaking to Kojo that she would care and support him for life, (despite the conflict that the arrival of the good Sister, 27 years ago, with a small Nigerian baby in her arms, caused within the religious order) would not denounce him and separate herself from him for any reason. She doesn’t condone, has never condoned, his actions, but she considers herself his Mother for life and has merely said that she hopes ‘he will get the help that he needs’.
On the other hand, an institution is greater than the individuals – even the individual whose inspiration and commitment founded the institution. Those sick children should, must, come first. The church does take safeguarding, both for the children and the staff, very, very seriously these days.
The trustees of Helen House have undoubtedly taken the only decision they could under the circumstances, one that I support; but I shall long remember this delve into historical actions and allegations – and the intensely sad outcome.
I can only find two people who have ever spoken up in support of a woman who has done so much for society – the Trustees of React, although they were unwilling to discuss the matter any longer, and Peter Unsworth, journalist of the Oxford Mail. Oxford Council are unwilling to field anyone to tell me whether she is still a Deputy Lord Lieutenant of Oxfordshire, and I shall watch with interest to see whether the Rotary Club of Falmouth honour their invitation to her to speak on March 3rd 2016.
Such a difference from the outcry regarding Lord Bramall when the CPS decided not to proceed with allegations against him.
What think you?
*Edited by Anna to add: Oxfordshire County Council have just deigned to answer – and tell me that Sister Dominica is still a Deputy Lieutenant for Oxfordshire County Council. Not been disowned by everyone then!
- The Blocked Dwarf
January 22, 2016 at 1:44 pm -
What think you?
You do not want to know and you’d not thank me for saying such things on your blog. Let’s just go with that Billy Connolly quote: “A lot of people say that it’s a lack of vocabulary that makes you swear. Rubbish. I know thousands of words but I still prefer “****” “
- The Blocked Dwarf
January 22, 2016 at 2:07 pm -
A quick google assures me that Helen & Douglas House receives great chunks of money from NHS England so a carefully worded FOI might, I suppose, uncover more details? Who were the Independent “Investigators” and how much was spent etc?
- Fat Steve
January 22, 2016 at 2:16 pm -
Just sad and a mess Anna,
The law of unexpected consequences ? Or the road to hell being paved with good intentions? Nurture or nature? A God intervening in the world to test a member of his Faithful? Random chance and chaos theory ? or just simply a malevolent spirit ?
Who knows ? and is there even an answer ? or ever a right way to view such matters ?
Such things are above my pay grade thank God - JuliaM
January 22, 2016 at 3:16 pm -
I’m reminded of those sad souls who take in abused or mistreated wild animals or dangerous dogs, and are then surprised when they, or more likely, their neighbours, are savaged.
- Don Cox
January 22, 2016 at 8:04 pm -
However, I doubt if the majority of adopted children grow up to be savage psychopaths.
I suspect that this child was brain-damaged by malnutrition, both before and after birth.
- Frankie
January 24, 2016 at 1:27 am -
‘…She doesn’t condone, has never condoned, his actions, but she considers herself his Mother for life’.
I agree with Julia and Fat Steve, there is a time to cut loose, and no amount of ‘previous’ can justify what this Kojo character has done. Good on you, Anna for trying to get to the bottom of this.Talk about biting the hand that feeds you…
- Don Cox
- David
January 22, 2016 at 3:40 pm -
Well, what can we say. The church, Monks, and Nuns, are a kettle of Fish. I have never come across groups of so called ‘religious’ people, who are anything but religious. They will, and do, stab each other in the back. They are mean, and lack empathy for other human beings.
Sister Frances Dominica Ritchie seems to be a ‘very’ rare exception to this rule, and by adopting a boy seems to have sealed her own fate many years later. The Church holds grudges, and Monks, and Nuns more so than most, and they will use any excuse to inflict their piety on others.- The Blocked Dwarf
January 22, 2016 at 4:11 pm -
Normally I’d disagree with you on sheer principle but in this case I have a horrible suspicion that there is a lot of truth in what you say. Certainly the Sisters decision to bar Ritchie from the House smacks more than just a little of Xian neighbourly loving kindness. Just as an aside, the most ‘Xian’ of Xians I have ever met were the Mormons…who most Xians wouldn’t count as Xians.
- Fat Steve
January 22, 2016 at 6:13 pm -
@David ….you need to watch a few episodes of brother Cadfael
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Margaret Jervis
January 22, 2016 at 4:37 pm -
Not clear whether the risk posed by the adoptee was material to the decision. I suppose it might have something to do with the allegations.
But since the proceedings began with the sexual allegations then that was the determinant.
Standard fare for over a decade in the catholic church – CoE not so centralised on safeguarding but has been upping the ante in response to high profile allegations and compo claims.
Catholic priests do now have a right of appeal which was implemented when it was realised the procedures were contrary to canon law.
But the whole thing can be callous and cruel on the basis of the flimsiest claims – priests and religious are ousted from their homes, livings and communities. They face DBS barring effectively preventing them from working or volunteering in any capacity dealing with children or ‘vulnerable adults’ ie doing what their skills and vocation meant. So the outlook is generally one of infinite ‘gardening leave.’Sister Dominica appears to have a great deal of community support and her case may highlight the hidden injustice affecting many innocent men and women. (BTW if she were charged, tried and acquitted she might not be in a better position re the ‘safeguarding’ decisions)
There’s no recourse to the human rights act re proportionality for church people because they are not public bodies.
- alan1803
January 22, 2016 at 5:19 pm -
Just a couple of minor points. Hard to fault the nuns on their reaction to Mother FD’s adoption of a child. A convent is designed for celibate women under vows of chastity. It would be difficult to see how it can accommodate a child adopted by one of the nuns, especially a boy who would achieve puberty while still a minor in the care of the adoptive mother. It’s less easy to be charitable about the actions of the trustees.
The acting bishop of Oxford, by the way, signs “Colin Dorchester” because he is suffragan bisop of Dorchester (on Thames, not county town of Dorset). That’s how Anglican prelates sign – Xtian name plus see – often in Latin abbreviation: +Justin Cantuar:, +John Ebor:, +Richard Londin:, etc.
- The Blocked Dwarf
January 22, 2016 at 6:15 pm -
Hard to fault the nuns on their reaction to Mother FD’s adoption of a child. A convent is designed for celibate women under vows of chastity
In today’s CoE it would have scarce caused a raised eyebrow heavenwards….unless of course the adopted baby was white, healthy, and should have gone to a black/Muslim/Lesbian couple ….
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Robert Edwards
January 22, 2016 at 7:35 pm -
No good deed should go unpunished…
- Nerezza
January 23, 2016 at 11:23 am -
I really admire her – everything that has happened to her, her son’s trial, the allegations of abuse, and the betrayal of her charity that she helped run and organise, and her arrest after helping so many, and all she says is that she remains “committed to the charity.”
What an amazing woman.
- acousticvillage
January 23, 2016 at 2:21 pm -
If the reasons for not allowing her on or near the premises of the hospices were reasons of safeguarding, and if the source of the safeguarding “problem” was the son and his unstable behaviour, fair enough. That is straightforward risk-assessment, and a decision taken which leaves no one with any blemish.
The Trustees statement seems to blame the Care Quality Commission for its decision…” we have to comply with requirements of the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and adhere to their safeguarding standards when considering the future management of the hospice”, and later, ” if we had not acted in this way Helen & Douglas House would have risked the consequences of non-compliance with our healthcare regulator”
The Trustee statement is therefore risk-averse and displays an ignorance of safeguarding and an ignorance of the fact that the CQC does not actually have minute specific standards that prevents organisations from acting as they see fit, providing they can justify it.
REACT gave a response which the Trustees could easily have given, without fear of any retribution from CQC.
However, given the actual source of the safeguarding risk was the allegation of sexual assualt on two women in 1976 and that these allegations were dismissed, it seems appalling that they might be the reason for the actions taken by christian people.
However, why can’t we know the full facts? What IS the story behind these two out-of-the-blue allegations? REACT seem to suggest that they are aware because Sister Frances shared everything with them.
“Sister Frances was open and honest in disclosing to us the nature of the circumstances behind the allegations and strenuously denied the accusations that neither relate to children nor her work with hospices. React takes the safeguarding of its families very seriously and it has continually assessed the development of the police enquiries relating to the allegations through the provision of documents shared with us by Sister Frances and her solicitor. We have found absolutely no reason to exclude Sister Frances from React’s activities and fully accept, and have complete faith in the CPS decision”
So, two completely different reactions from two organisations, faced with the same information.
If fear of the CQC was the only thing stopping the Trustees of Helen House from coming and going, why did they not challenge and clarify this with them? Do CQC know the outcome of their behaviour towards care organisations and how they are perceived? Did someone at CQC “imply” and go beyond their legal remit in “advising” the Trustees?
But as a reader, I am still stuck with the questions,
Where did these two allegations come from and why
Is there some kind of charitable behaviour that Sister Frances gave to two women that later on was turned against her?
Without the allegations this story is bizarre enough. With the allegations it is more than confusing. - Ed P
January 23, 2016 at 3:43 pm -
Our society is now so diminished by these retrospective slanders of easy targets. Mud sticks, even after proof of innocence.
What kind of sick individual makes unsubstantiated allegations against people such as Sister Domenica? And why have our police become so focussed of these often risible allegations, wasting time and manpower on them when crimes go ignored, uninvestigated and unsolved?
I loathe conspiracy theories, but there seems to be a hidden agenda here, probably connected with the great multi-culti (and thankfully now failing) EU project.
Concentrate of the deck furniture, listen to the band, ignore the looming wall of ice. - Mrs Grimble
January 23, 2016 at 8:44 pm -
“I loathe conspiracy theories, but there seems to be a hidden agenda here, probably connected with the great multi-culti (and thankfully now failing) EU project.”
You’ll have to explain your reasoning. I don’t think any European country has had the epidemic of historical CSA allegations that the UK is going through. But there is one other country that has – the good old US of A. It started with the SRA panic in the 1980s/90s and has continued ever since, right up to Michael Jackson, Jerry Sandusky and Bill Cosby. There are also the same wild “VIP paedos conspiracy” claims and the same victim mentality, the same #IbelieveHer culture and the same compensation culture, only writ much, much larger. It’s very much an Anglo-American disease!
Perhaps you’re trying to make some convoluted point about political correctedness and insinuating that Koko was the “third party” who reported the allegations? But since since the allegations concerned events that took place a full decade before he was even born, that seems unlikely.However, I’ve just had an interesting thought. All the “victims” making claims of historical sex abuse appear to be white; or at least the ones who go on TV weeping about how their lives were ruined are. Maybe there ARE complainants who aren’t white, and they just have more dignity than to milk the publicity?
- David
January 24, 2016 at 9:12 am -
Mrs Grimble, I know of one complainant in the UK who is not white, but, alas, he is also not alive. Vishal Mehrotra was abducted in London the day of the Royal Wedding of Prince Charles, and Diana. He was later found dead in a field outside London. He was eight years old, not white, but he was a victim. His father is now the ‘complainant’.
- Mrs Grimble
January 25, 2016 at 6:37 pm -
Yes, that’s a sad case. But I was talking about the live complainants of historical abuse by celebrities. Not murder victims.
- Mrs Grimble
- Ian B
January 25, 2016 at 1:09 am -
SRA and Paedohysteria did indeed come from the USA, it crossed the Atlantic primarily due to Feminist connections. As I understand it the VIP Conspiracy theory is also popular among Scandinavian radical feminist groups, but has not yet had the same level of impact as here. It may be partly because although Sweden (fr’instance) has an even more PC press, it doesn’t have the same level of yellow journalism in the tabloid stylee as we do (The Mail, Sun, News Of The Screws, Mirror, Express etc) with our famous toxic combination of titillation and moral outrage.
America and Britain share in common superpower status (we handed it over to them after the war) and a long Puritan heritage, the latter resulting in centuries of kulturkampf between, in particular in England, a lower class bawdy, coarse “liberalism” and a “middle” class Calvinist censoriousness which really erupted seriously when the new Middle Class arrived with Victorian Industrialisation and decided their justification for being nobs was to be moral guardians of everyone else. America’s similar but different intense evangelical protestantism (which in the last surge ended with Prohibition) thus tends to strike a powerful chord this side of the Atlantic. It doesn’t take much to ignite us and unite us in moral hysteria. The 19th Century Puritan wave was a time of sexual panic; this 3rd Puritan wave is the same, just the particular formulations are a bit different. With the reinvention of homosexuals as closer to women and thus the angels, the stalking shadow of the “paedophile” has become Satan this time.
Anyway, basic point seems to me to be that success in Britain has been due to close ties in the Feminist movements, and a general population easily led into sexual panics for historical (and hysterical) reasons.
- David
- Flaxen Saxon
January 24, 2016 at 9:02 am -
This woman is drenched in death but has no life.
- Mzungu
January 25, 2016 at 6:42 am -
I’m going to go out on a limb here: absence of a father or positive male (and black?) role model?
- manosque
February 1, 2016 at 8:58 am -
Came across your blog by sheer coincidence and wow it shows how little homework you do. These are peoples lives you are messing with. Very little of what you say about Kojo Ritchie is true. He is no angel but wow do you go overboard. You know nothing about his life. I do and so much of your statements are simply added to for sensation. I have known him since he entered the country and was saved from death by a kind and giving person. Yours is mischievous talk.
- Classical Pioneer
February 19, 2016 at 10:23 pm -
Anna Raccoon is going overboard? I think not. I know nothing about his life either, but I am capable of reading newspaper reports of court proceedings. ‘He is no angel’ seems to me to be a bit of an understatement.
- Classical Pioneer
- ProperEllipsis
February 3, 2016 at 4:07 pm -
I publicly spoke up for SFD many times via social media and have had numerous email exchanges with REACT about their continued relationship with her. In short the allegations were totally ludicrous. All staff employed at the care homes she founded and at a residential home for the elderly (also in St Mary’s Road) have been banned from discussing any of the case with anyone.
- ProperEllipsis
February 3, 2016 at 4:11 pm -
I even Tweeted Sir Stephen Bubb (one of the trustees) and said I could accuse him quite easily – I have met him. Needless to say he did not reply.
- Classical Pioneer
February 20, 2016 at 10:38 am -
Clearly, having a man with a penchant for punching, kidnap and machetes hovering around elderly nuns and sick children is not a good idea – though by making this clear, the Order could well have found themselves accused of a lack of Christian charity – he was an adopted orphan, after all – or, God forbid, racism.
How very convenient that his adoptive mother was the subject of historic sexual abuse allegations. Never mind that there was no evidence! It was enough to have her banned from the hospices, which in my view rather got around the tricky problem of how to distance themselves from the son.
Of course, I am sure that the allegations of historic sexual abuse against SFD were not concocted for this very purpose.
{ 32 comments… read them below or add one }