Chapter 15 — Daingean

Neglect

He then very simply described the equipment as, on the whole, poor. He found that the infrastructure of the dormitories, which had been recently built, was fine, but the beds, sheets and blankets were often substandard, and grubby. The junior toilets were smelly and messy. The items that needed regular supervision, cleaning and laundering, in other words, were showing neglect.

The kitchens received a close examination. Dr Lysaght summarised his findings: Altogether the kitchen section is a poor effort – it is unsuitable in its structure, inadequate in its equipment and while it is impossible to be critical of personnel forced to work under such conditions I would feel that the brother cook would benefit by instruction and experience of other kitchens. Dining Room Poorly lighted, low ceiling room adjoining kitchen. While it is also in an old building & suffers from the disadvantage of poor lighting and low ceiling I feel its general air of dinginess & old work house atmosphere could be improved by an intelligent use of decoration and paint on the room and furniture. The one thing it has is plenty of wall space and it is capable of taking many more tables.

Then Dr Lysaght turned his attention to the food itself, and was in general critical of the diet provided, for example: As regards breakfast with the exception of Sunday it is just tea and B & B36 – it seems unusual that porridge & milk is not provided on any morning. Another unusual feature is that despite having their own farm and a battery egg system eggs only appear on the menu once i.e. Sunday morning breakfast. In contrast to industrial schools fruit in season does not appear on the menu at all. Cheese a most valuable and cheap form of protein food only appears once for Friday tea. I see no reason why it should not be made available on the one other evening when meat is not served for tea viz – Sunday. It would seem to me that the whole question of food, cooking, service, kitchen and dining room facilities etc call for consideration and efforts to improve the present position. As in most male religious institutions the food departments lag behind those in most institutions run by nuns. – they are operated in a rough and ready style & do not approach in any way kitchen departments under the control of women, whether nuns or lay.

Turning his attention to the state of the boys’ clothing, he found much to be desired: Clothing - I was not impressed by their general appearance.

When he looked at the medical records, it was the paucity of information that drew his criticism. He did not know whether the absence of information was due to the School having healthy children or due to omission. In particular, the lack of any record of inoculations or measures against infectious diseases concerned him. There was no nurse in the Institution at the time of Dr Lysaght’s inspection, but it was hoped to employ one in the near future, and this he hoped would bring about an improvement in the recording of information on the boys’ medical cards.

Finally, Dr Lysaght was very critical of the lack of hot water in the washroom and showers and, although he inspected during the summer, the heating was inadequate. Washroom Source: Martin Reynolds

All of the criticisms made by the members of the Kennedy Committee are to be found in Dr Lysaght’s report. They both found that: The boys were grubby and unkempt. Clothing was poor and torn, worse than in other schools. Showers were inadequate. The building was cold and poorly heated. Food was adequate in quantity but mostly carbohydrate. Despite having a battery farm producing eggs they were infrequently served to the boys. Most of the building was dingy and dark. Beds and sheets were poorly kept, and many were dirty and had threadbare blankets.

Dr Lysaght has criticisms not found in Kennedy, for example the inadequacy of medical records. The only criticism in Kennedy not also found in Lysaght is the condemnation of corporal punishment. Yet, the Oblates found Lysaght careful and balanced and ‘one would have to accept it’.

Apart from the issue of corporal punishment, they appear to have found the same things but reached a different conclusion about whether the School was fit to remain open. The Department of Education had enough information from their Inspector to reach a decision on the matter in 1966. What we do learn from comparing the two reports is that between 1966 and 1968 no improvements were made, and possibly matters had deteriorated.

The lack of teaching staff and teaching Brothers affected the level of education offered to the boys. Daingean, for the majority of its existence, never had an adequate teaching regime to cater for the requirements and needs of its pupils. The issue of education given to the boys in Daingean had always been a contentious and problematic one. The Department of Education wrote in 1967: the educational aspects of this reformatory school for boys in Daingean, Co. Offaly, has been shamefully neglected over many years. The boys were illiterate on entering the school and were given very little education during their two years of normal time in the institute. As a result of financial restrictions, the directors had to make use of them as labourers. It is proposed now to put an end this neglect.

The Oblates in their Opening Statement stated that the Brothers and other members of staff always provided certain classroom education in the usual subjects of the primary school programme. There was also vocational training in various trades and occupations given by Brothers of the staff, for example, carpentry, tailoring, shoemaking, printing, and farm and garden work.

For the majority of the School’s history, however, Daingean had only one or two lay teachers, paid for by the Oblates, to cater for the primary educational needs of its entire population of boys. Two lay technical teachers were supplied and paid for in 1946 by Offaly Vocational Education Committee. These taught the manual subjects in the School. A 1966 report, written in order to seek the establishment of a primary school in Daingean, gave the figures relating to the education of the boys: 30 boys received metal or woodwork instruction. 25 boys received secular instruction in a lay teacher’s class. The School had 112 residents in residence at this time. The remainder of the boys (60 in number) who do not receive technical or primary education spend their time working. This report concluded that every boy resident in the School was in need of a primary education, and a primary school for Daingean was justified.

Therefore, up to 50 percent of the boys in Daingean were not receiving any formal education in Daingean in 1966. This is reflected in the evidence given to the Investigation Committee, with numerous witnesses stating that the education they received in Daingean was poor to non-existent. Throughout the 1960s in Daingean, and in particular during Fr Luca’s period as Resident Manager, attempts were made to improve this situation.

Change in the school subjects developed on a modest level, and extra classes were provided. The Oblates said that this was done at the request of the boys to stop the boredom of the playground. A prolonged debate between the Department of Education and the Oblate authorities led to the recognition of a special national school in Daingean. However, it would close three years later. With the advent of the national school, the teaching numbers were increased, and it was proposed to recognise the School under the national school grouping and to pay the teachers. This was implemented on 5th January 1970, and Daingean was recognised as a special national school, with four teachers under the management of Fr Luca.

Fr Hughes blamed the State for this neglect of education: It did not supply any funds for teachers or for anything else, it was just left entirely to the school to find its resources from the capitation grant.