Explore the Ryan Report

Chapter 12 — Salthill

Back
Show Contents

Neglect and emotional abuse

181

Regarding Salthill, the Association made three complaints: The Manager of St. Joseph’s is elderly and has no training in Child Care. He was appointed to his present post in August 1970 and it is his first experience of working in an Industrial School. Since his appointment he has discouraged the Godparent idea and has refused any additional Godparents, even though many of the boys have no family to take them out for regular visits. We get the impression that he is unaware of the great difficulties which the boys face when they leave the institution – serious difficulties which we are coming across continuously. The boys in primary school do not go out to school. St. Josephs is an all male institution ... We fully agree with the Reports’ Assessment of the disadvantage of this sex segregation. There is no question of any of the children in ... St. Josephs ... being educated to the ultimate of their capacity. There is a crying need ... for specialised teaching and provision for third level education. After Care is simply non-existent. ... boys are unable to find suitable digs, are unable to manage in flats and have no place to go for holidays or days off, no one to care for them if they are sick or unemployed. Their extreme loneliness often drives them to do the very things for which they are branded. Not alone is there a need for pre-release Hostels and trained social workers & After Care agents but that these trained people should be working with the children during the years prior to their discharge, thus being well-acquainted with them & gaining their confidence.

182

The letter went on: We feel that there is no justification for the continued existence of either ... or St Josephs’ in their present form. The damage being done to the children in both institutions can only be halted by an immediate change in the system.

183

In the summer of 1972, a representative of the Godparents Association wrote, on its behalf, to the Provincial Council expressing deep concern for the boys in Salthill. She did not elaborate on what these concerns were, but requested a meeting with members of the Council to discuss the problems. She received short shrift from the Council, who informed her in no uncertain terms that they saw little purpose in convening such a meeting and suggested that she discuss any issues with the Resident Manager who, she was assured, would be ‘very sympathetic and accommodating’. The true sentiments of the Provincial Council to the approach by the Association were reflected in an undated memorandum which stated: They wrote a highly critical and uncomplimentary letter to the Galway Advertiser about the Nuns in Lenaboy. Are in the bad books of the Bishop. Went to the Minister. Are interfering and seek notoriety.

184

The Christian Brothers were quite happy to dismiss the Association rather than seek elaboration on the substance of their concerns.

185

A year later, the Irish Countrywomen’s Association wrote a strong report to the Department of Education, calling for urgent action to deal with the plight of children in industrial schools. They identified the key aim of childcare as being to prevent family breakdown and saw residential care as a last resort. They were particularly critical of the single-sex policy that operated in Galway, which led to the inevitable break-up of families: We have witnessed the heartbreak of these deprived children on arrival at the institutions; the added heartbreak when they are separated, brothers from sisters. Our own doctors have treated the children for lice, scabies and contagious impetigo and are willing to bear testimony to this.

186

They were also critical of the aftercare provided in Galway: Many of the boys leave at sixteen with only a very poor primary education and go from one menial job to another. It is not unusual for one boy to have been in nine jobs in the space of two years. For some time there has been a pattern of boys from St Josephs sleeping out because they have nowhere to go. Some boys who have left Galway within the past three years are now in Limerick jail. What becomes of those who emigrate?

187

Conditions in Salthill in 1973 were described by a former manager, Br Ames,32 who took up office in that year. He described his experiences there in an interview he gave for Congregation purposes. When he arrived in August 1973, there were about 47 boys in the School. He found that there was no trust with the older boys but it was possible to communicate with the younger ones. There was some bullying going on by the bigger boys, and they were able to intimidate the younger ones from relating to the Brothers. He said the boys were violent and cruel.

188

It was clear to Br Ames that big changes had to be made, and he decided that the place should be changed into residential homes. He stated that he failed to get funding for the work from the Department of Education and so went to the bank and borrowed £15,000. The Department of Education discovery, however, indicated that, in 1974, ‘The Home was remodelled interiorly at a cost of £8,000 £6,000 of a grant was given by the Dep. of Education’.

189

Br Ames said that he and his colleagues tried different schemes, and eventually installed 15 bedrooms with living/dining areas attached, so as to replicate a family environment as far as possible.

190

Other changes were made whereby staff were increased and engaged full-time in care work rather than having to teach. Older boys who were going out to work used the School as a residential facility to help them with the transition from institutional life to that in the outside world. The other boys went out to school instead of being taught in the Institution. They were able to make friends and acquaintances outside, and sometimes visitors came back to the School. Members of a family could live together in one unit. If a parent visited, he or she could be welcomed and treated with respect.

191

The whole system, in short, was organised on civilised and sensitive lines, with a view to making the lives of the boys as close to normal as possible. Br Ames acknowledged that what he did could not have been achieved with larger numbers, but he did point out that another Brother had had considerable success in Artane when he reduced the number of boys in a unit to 30.

192

Br Ames was proud of his achievements in Salthill. The need for change was driven by the rejection by society generally of the institutionalised childcare that had been the hallmark of Christian Brother involvement in this area. As was clear from the letters quoted above, thinking had moved on and regimes such as Salthill were no longer acceptable.

193

According to Br Ames, the results were remarkable. The boys were happier. Their behaviour in the Institution improved enormously. They were more sociable. They were more comfortable than before in dealing with animals, which Br Ames had begun to introduce into the School. Relations with the staff were greatly improved, and there was much less friction between the different groups of boys.

194

Br Ames and Br Burcet were also responsible for introducing professional childcare workers and male and female house parents in the Institution. They adopted modern methods to meet the different needs of the children. The Brothers revitalised the Managers’ Association, which brought together the Resident Managers from all industrial schools and reformatories in the country, using it to meet regularly and to discuss the work that they were doing with the children in their care. Br Ames worked on a draft Charter of Rights for children in care. The Association organised an international conference that was held in Ireland in 1979.

195

The development of the thinking of the Brothers in this School showed what could have been achieved in other industrial schools under their care. By the time these changes were brought about, Artane, Letterfrack, Tralee, Carriglea and Glin had all been closed. Only Salthill remained, and the need for control of the system by the Congregation was gone.


Footnotes
  1. This is a pseudonym.
  2. This is a pseudonym.
  3. This is a pseudonym.
  4. This is a pseudonym.
  5. This is a pseudonym.
  6. This is a pseudonym.
  7. This is a pseudonym.
  8. This is a pseudonym.
  9. This is a pseudonym.
  10. This is a pseudonym.
  11. This is a pseudonym.
  12. This is a pseudonym.
  13. This is a pseudonym.
  14. This is a pseudonym.
  15. This is a pseudonym.
  16. This is a pseudonym.
  17. This is a pseudonym.
  18. This is a pseudonym.
  19. This is a pseudonym.
  20. This is a pseudonym.
  21. This is a pseudonym.
  22. This is a pseudonym.
  23. This is a pseudonym.
  24. This is a pseudonym.
  25. This is a pseudonym.
  26. This is a pseudonym.
  27. This is a pseudonym.
  28. This is a pseudonym.
  29. This is a pseudonym.
  30. Dr Anna McCabe was the Department of Education Inspector for most of the relevant period. See the Department of Education chapter for a discussion of her role and performance.
  31. This is a pseudonym.
  32. This is a pseudonym.
  33. This is a reference to the Gardaí.