Chapter 9 — Tralee

Emotional abuse

In 1957 the Report remarked on the quality of emotional support. It noted the Brothers were generally ‘sympathetic and considerate in their dealings with the boys and hence the Institution does, as far as possible, resemble a home’ and there was no attempt to run away.

The relationship between the boys and the Brothers in charge was very rarely described in positive terms by ex-residents of industrial schools, but many Brothers had a different understanding. Even today, some Brothers looking back at their time in schools such as Tralee do not appear to appreciate how the School impacted on the children who were sent there.

The Brothers who appeared before the Investigation Committee spoke of their daily routine and the stresses of working in Tralee. Four of the seven Brothers who worked in Tralee for other than holiday relief spoke about the busy days they had in the School, and one of them spoke about the stress it placed him under. This respondent, Br Mahieu, stated that he had a lot of supervision to do. It was generally the two or three teaching Brothers who organised and took responsibility for the daily activity, the timetables and the routines in the School. He also spoke about the arrival of boys from Glin and Upton in 1966 as causing a difficulty in terms of looking after them and trying to cope with them. He said it caused ‘an awful lot of extra vigilance’. He became less happy with his work there until they had ‘got to grips with the situation’. Other Brothers also spoke about the long hours.

Br Mahieu spoke of the difficulty of dealing with bed-wetters. He had nobody to help him, and trying to cope with it wore him down. The only resource available was an old-fashioned laundry. He acknowledged that he would get frustrated and would use the strap, which he bitterly regretted. He felt he was put into an almost impossible situation. There could be six or eight bed-wetters and soilers in a dormitory.

The 1966 Visitation Report noted that a number of older Brothers resided in Tralee, and advised that every member of staff should be able to take his share of duties and help to lighten the burden of the others, and this was going to be all the more necessary when the boys from Glin arrived. In the circumstances, the Visitor felt Tralee was not a suitable place for the old Brothers. With these older, more infirm Brothers unable to work, the burden of work fell unfairly on the younger Brothers. The evidence of Br Lisle confirmed that in 1966 there were only four Brothers, including himself, available to run the School, out of a total of 11 Brothers in the Community. He pointed out he was not trained as a teacher. Br Mahieu claimed that one of the remaining Brothers, Br Marceau, was not someone to whom supervision duties could be given.

Like those in other Christian Brothers institutions, Brothers in Tralee did not receive any training in childcare. According to the Opening Statement of the Christian Brothers, newcomers had to rely on the example and advice of senior colleagues. They also relied on the support of established routines and procedures. Six of the seven former permanent staff members who gave evidence to the Investigation Committee had all entered the novitiate at 14 or 15, and were no more than 18 years old after completing their first year in St Helen’s. All seven were aged between 24 and 28 when they arrived in Tralee. Br Bevis said that he did not believe early entry into the seminary affected his ability to cope with the boys emotionally, but he did concede that he needed more experience and that, if he had the chance to go back, he would do things differently.

Br Mahieu, when referring to the difficulties experienced when the boys from Glin and Upton arrived in Tralee, stated: Now, that made it extremely difficult for us. Like, when I was sent to Tralee ... I got no training whatsoever, not even one single word. All I was given was, I was given a leather strap. Nobody thought it worthwhile to give me training for residential care.

He said that they badly needed training when they had the mix of boys from Upton, Glin and Tralee. He was never given any direction in relation to the type of discipline he could administer to the boys, either by the Department of Education or the Christian Brothers. In their Final Submissions, the Christian Brothers said that a review of the entire transcript of this respondent’s evidence indicated that these comments were not intended as a criticism of the Congregation but were, with the benefit of hindsight, expressing regret that specialist training was not provided for persons in his position at that time.

Brothers were not given any induction course or training on arrival in Tralee. Visitation Reports, Department Inspections and the issue of emotional abuse

The Visitation Reports invariably described the boys as happy, and no comments were made about any emotional needs. They referred frequently to the good atmosphere in Tralee and the good relations between the boys and the Brothers.

The 1959 Visitation Report commented that the discipline was ‘satisfactory. The boys are at their ease and a spirit of cooperation and good-will prevails’.

There was little evidence that the Visitors or the Department’s Inspectors ever spoke to the boys in the schools.35 These failures to consult with the boys were flaws in both the management of the school and supervision by the Department.

The Investigation Committee did hear some positive comments from the former pupils who attended oral hearings. Two complainants identified two different Brothers in charge of the farm as being kind and good to the boys.

One witness said that one of these two Brothers, Br Reve, knew what was going on in Tralee at the time. He was living under the stairs in the School, not in the Brothers’ quarters because, according to the witness, he was dirty from farm work and he was regarded by the other Brothers as a ‘dirty little man’. The boys were able to talk to him about being hurt and he always said to them ‘There is nothing I can do about it’.

Another complainant said he did not mind going to work on the farm as the Brother there, Br Avery, was ‘brilliant’ and ‘nice to everyone’. He said that this particular Brother took the shotgun to Br Marceau36 once or twice because of his cruelty to the boys and ‘told him to stop it once and for all’.