Chapter 15 — Daingean

Sexual abuse

He said that, if boys got caught, the ‘purity strap’ would be used on them. The ‘purity strap’ was the use of the strap to beat boys found engaged in sexual activity. He went on to explain that contact with the younger boys could be in the shop, which was common to both the bigger and younger boys. Once the older boy had found a ‘wan doll’, a relationship would develop during the periods the boys were in the Institution. Yet, he added, ‘When everybody leaves that place, Daingean, nobody says another word about it, blocked, nobody opens their mouth about it’.

When asked what proportion of boys were involved in this relationship culture, he answered: I think most of them was in it because it’s well known. We could ask, “Who is your wan doll”, that was the phrase ... All my mates in the big section, they all had wan dolls.

It came as a surprise to him when he left to discover the practice was not spoken of outside the walls of Daingean. When he met a former inmate, he casually asked, while reminiscing, ‘Who was your wan doll?’ The man ‘never said another word, he got up and walked away ... Nobody talks about it’.

The opportunities were there, as one witness explained: The reason that a lot of the sexual stuff went on was because there would be – if you could imagine in the yard there was a square like this (indicating) and this was the small section and this was the big section and a Brother would stand in this corner (indicating) so he was strategically placed to be able to see in both directions. You had the toilet block over there and over here you had an entrance into some inside toilets which is where most of the sexual abuse went on ... So all it needed was some individual to distract one Brother and all sorts would go on.

As another witness explained, ‘It was like you were kind of protected. You see it was in the small sections and when all the fellows in the small sections knew that he was your hag they wouldn’t go near him’.

While on one level, within a subculture in Daingean, this sexualised behaviour was taken for granted, at another level it could lead to bullying and ostracism. Boys who were known to offer oral sex were excluded, especially at meal times. As one witness explained: there was some boys that no-one went near. The fellows that were sexually abused down there. The other boys wouldn’t have anything to do with them really. They had to mark their teacups with a knife. There wasn’t delft down there ... The saucers, the cups, the plates were Bakelite, that was kind of plastic, I remember. If a young fellow was sexually abused ... after gobbling somebody, they had to mark their cup (indicating) with a knife and they could only drink out of that cup ... No one else could drink out of them.

Fr Luca, in his Statement, gave his account of this relationship culture within Daingean. He wrote: There were boys that were under pressure from maybe a few bigger boys. Strangely to say it wasn’t always from the bigger boys. Some of the most astute or hardened at that particular time were small boys who had a kind of power over bigger boys and it was they who were calling the tune. I think they would have used that as a grip ... something to use over another boy. And, again, they would have something for sale, there would be an ulterior motive in the friendship ... The older ones would prey on the younger ones and some of the younger ones could have a hold on the bigger boys. Knowing what they wanted, prepared to give it to them and then at a price. There would have been awareness of that. We would have known that some of these boys had been quite involved in boy prostitution in the city.

The Oblates stated in their Submission that no evidence was tendered to support a finding that such abuse was systemic or widespread in the School, or that such behaviour was in any way tolerated.

1.The Oblates acknowledged that they were aware of the issue of peer abuse, and they accepted that incidents of peer abuse did take place. They contended, however, that they did not condone it and took steps at all times to prevent it. However, the evidence would indicate that no distinction was made by the authorities between victims and perpetrators of sexual abuse. Victims were punished as severely as the perpetrators and, therefore, the problem was not fully reported to management. 2.Sexual behaviour between boys in Daingean was systemic and widespread. It was often abusive and was not seriously addressed by management. 3.These institutionalised sexual relationships developed to such a degree in Daingean because of the chronic lack of supervision throughout the institution, particularly during recreation. 4.Lack of supervision led to an unsafe environment. Some younger boys may have had control over older boys, as Fr Luca suggested, but the younger boys needed protection. They resorted to such relationships in order to survive in an unsafe world. 5.Such sexual behaviour was accepted within a subculture in Daingean. 6.Boys in Daingean ranged between 13 and 18 years, an older profile than in industrial schools, which contributed to the higher level of sexual activity there.

Emotional abuse

Numerous complainant witnesses recounted the loneliness and deprivation they felt on being suddenly removed from their families. Central to their accounts was the belief that they were on their own, with no one they could turn to for help or comfort.

One witness described this isolation. He explained he had to put on ‘a façade’ to hide his distress: I cried in bed at night missing my mother and father just the same as anybody else would. But if you showed weakness at all to anybody, including a psychologist ... it was jumped on.

There were, he went on, many staff members who were good men, good to him and to the boys, but when asked if he could go to them about the beatings or the sexual abuse he had experienced, he replied: No. There was no recourse. There was no safe haven. There was no hole you could climb into. There was nobody you could talk to. You were on your own.

Another witness described a similar sense of isolation. He said: There was very few people that did much talking in that place at all, very, very few ... you could sit beside them for hours, they wouldn’t say a word to you. There wasn’t very many garrulous people there. We didn’t have a book, a paper, a radio, we didn’t have a watch or a calendar.

Yet, another witness described a similar experience. He said: there was no camaraderie as such. Everybody was there to get their time done and to get out and there was no interest in anything else ... You didn’t make lifelong friends ... There was one young chap and he was from somewhere in east Cork. After I hardened a little bit to the situation he used to come to me and tell me what was on his mind and I used to talk to him. Now, the reason he was there times weren’t good. Poverty abounded, his mother happened to get a loaf of bread, but they didn’t have any butter. So he went out and stole a pound of butter. He got four years for it. Instead of being looked after and given some sympathy and understanding he got four years in Daingean. What kind of society were we? It might be different now, but in those times that is what happened. Those were the facts of life. The people like the Oblates took advantage, they really took advantage and used people like that as child labour.

He added: there was no real friends in Daingean ... that’s why I felt detached ... If you are lonesome, if you are alone, and you are at that vulnerable age you don’t feel over the moon, do you?