Chapter 7 — Goldenbridge

Neglect

Throughout the 1950s, the food and diet of the children was described as ‘very good’ by Dr McCabe. She spoke favourably of the food and diet when she inspected the School on two occasions in 1955. In particular, she stated that the meals ‘were attractive, well cooked and attractively served’.

Dr McCabe retired in 1963, and Dr Lysaght inspected Goldenbridge on behalf of the Department in March 1966. He wrote a detailed report in which he noted that the children looked well nourished and healthy. He inspected the main meal of the day, which consisted of soup, milk, mincemeat, vegetables, custard and tinned pears, and he found that the amounts served were ample and well cooked.

The School was aware in advance of Dr McCabe’s inspection, and ex-residents recalled that extra food was provided. Dr McCabe did not eat with the children, and based her report on observation of the food served on the day of her inspection.

Sr Alida stated that the Department inspectors did not examine or taste the food that was given to the children: I cannot say that I ever saw an inspector with a spoon or anything tasting food, I cannot say I ever saw it.

The Inspector from the Department of Education always had her meal in the convent and not with the children in the dining room.

The majority of the witnesses who testified to the Committee complained of hunger and inadequate food during their time in Goldenbridge. They spoke of constantly being hungry. The quality and quantity of the food that was provided was the subject of numerous complaints by the witnesses. They also talked about the difference in the quality of food which the lay staff received compared to the food given to the children; the food provided to the staff was far superior in quality.

A witness described the difference: Oh yes. It was different, it was lovely to go in there, you could see what they were eating. They had a press with all kind of goodies in it ...

However, one witness stated that the food did improve after 1967, and she received ‘lovely dinners’ after that time.

One witness said: ’I remember being hungry all the time’.

Another said: I was always hungry, but then I have always had a good appetite but I never felt full. The only time I felt full if you went out with your family and you got sweets and things like that.

Another said she was hungry, and explained: Well, simply because we had so little to eat. I do remember all the girls used to eat, there were plants around a field, there was a hedge and we used to call them bread and butter plants. I remember that. We would eat the leaves off the hedges. Then from 4.30 p.m. when we had supper which consisted of cocoa and bread and butter, that was it then, nothing else until breakfast the next morning.

One witness described the food as: ‘basic. It was just bread and water or bread and tea and that was it’. He also complained of not receiving enough food: ... because when the food was put on the table it was grabbed so you were either fortunate or you weren’t. A lot of the time I was unfortunate because I was very small anyway.

When asked about whether they ever got treats, another witness said: We did eventually as time went on. There would be a nice cake on the table for Easter or something, yes there was, but that would have been maybe twice a year, maybe Christmas. Yes, there was sometimes some treats.

One witness described the effect of lack of food on her, ’I used to eat compulsively when I came out because I was hungry in Goldenbridge’.

As she had younger siblings, she gave her portion of food to them: I used to often give my own food to the kids because they were forever hungry. I actually got a taste for eating wet muck because when I had a pain in my tummy I would eat that and it would take the pain away.