Forensics discover remains of another 22 infants at Irish mother and baby house of horrors site where hundreds of corpses are feared buried 37%

By Jada Bas65%

7/22/2026, 6:50:35 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Availability Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 28.9% saturation with 106 hits. Analysis detected 639 faulty-reasoning hits from 367 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 43.5% and a BS Rank of 37% (13,872 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 63.40% of the article peer group.

Investigators at Ireland's infamous mother and baby house of horrors have made a grim new discovery, unearthing the remains of another 22 infants at the site where up to 800 corpses are feared to lie. 
The excavation team in Tuam, County Galway, which began its painstaking work in July last year, has recovered a total of 99 bodies. 
The newly discovered remains were found in coffins in an area on the south-western edge of the site, which was described in documents as a 'burial ground'. 
They are now being taken to a new mortuary and laboratory in Toghermore, Tuam, where experts will clean, dry and examine the remains. 
The agency carrying out the excavation, known as the Office of the Director of Authorised Intervention (ODAIT), said the examination will include radiology and 3D scanning. 
It will aim to 'reconstruct details of their lives and deaths', like their age and sex. 
Dr Niamh McCullagh, Senior Forensic consultant, told ITV News: 'To find such a high number this early in the excavation of this space specifically, indicates to us there are more in the area. 
'It's significant that we have found what appears to be a burial ground and that the remains are so concentrated in that space, and we expect to find more.' 
The 99 sets of remains found so far were buried in coffins and 62 people have given DNA samples to help with identifying them. 
The home at Tuam first drew international attention in 2014, when local historian Catherine Corless uncovered 796 death certificates for babies and young children who died there, yet found no burial records at all. 
The institution was part of a network of houses across Ireland where pregnant unmarried women were sent to give birth during the 20th century and then were forcibly separated from their babies. 
Death records suggest on average two babies a week were dying there, many due to malnutrition and treatable illnesses. 
The institution, operated by the Bon Secours Sisters on behalf of Galway County Council, was open from 1925 until its closure in 1961. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 24.3%Jada Bas: 10.7%Daily Mail: 3.7%Confirmation Bias24.3%This article: 9.0%Jada Bas: 6.1%Daily Mail: 1.0%Anchoring Bias9.0%This article: 15.5%Jada Bas: 5.2%Daily Mail: 3.5%Availability Heuristic15.5%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Jada Bas: 1.7%Daily Mail: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias5.2%This article: 6.3%Jada Bas: 7.4%Daily Mail: 9.1%Framing Effect6.3%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.4%Jada Bas: 1.5%Daily Mail: 2.3%Optimism Bias4.4%This article: 9.5%Jada Bas: 3.2%Daily Mail: 1.2%Pessimism Bias9.5%This article: 28.9%Jada Bas: 24.8%Daily Mail: 12.8%Negativity Bias28.9%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 4.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 9.3%Jada Bas: 3.1%Daily Mail: 1.6%Recency Bias9.3%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 1.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.0%Jada Bas: 3.0%Daily Mail: 4.0%Appeal to Authority9.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 16.9%Jada Bas: 8.6%Daily Mail: 4.3%Hasty Generalization16.9%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.2%Jada Bas: 7.0%Daily Mail: 7.6%Appeal to Emotion5.2%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 9.3%Jada Bas: 3.1%Daily Mail: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.3%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 6.3%Jada Bas: 2.1%Daily Mail: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)6.3%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.0%Jada Bas: 3.0%Daily Mail: 3.8%Unattributed Quote9.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 1.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 6.3%Jada Bas: 7.4%Daily Mail: 9.2%Biased Writer Voice6.3%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jada Bas: 0.0%Daily Mail: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

367 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers28%attributed speech263writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageOffice of the Director of Authorised Intervention (ODAIT) • 26 words • 0.0% coverageOffice of the Director of Authorised Intervention (ODAIT) • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDr Niamh McCullagh • 33 words • 100.0% coverageDr Niamh McCullagh • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Dr Niamh McCullagh

100%flagged-word coverage
62 attributed words60% of attributed speech52% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Unattributed Quote+53.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Dr Niamh McCullagh: 53.2%53.2%Biased Writer Voice-8.7 ptsWriter: 8.7%Dr Niamh McCullagh: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.