Chapter 9 — Clifden

Neglect

The Congregation submits that it is likely that complainants merged together the different types of chores they engaged in at different ages and failed to distinguish between chores and industrial training.

In Clifden, as in all girls’ industrial schools, much of the maintenance and upkeep of the School was done by the residents, often in the guise of domestic training.

Clifden was characterised by an exceptionally small staff, and it is therefore inevitable that the heavy maintenance work associated with a large institution was done by the girls themselves. Even complainants who were critical of the School conceded that it was kept spotlessly clean, and it was clear from the reports of Dr McCabe that she was impressed by the hygiene standards there. This was achieved by a disciplined round of chores and duties on the part of the girls. It also appears that the older girls had to provide the high level of care needed by the very young children. The distinction between using children as a labour force and providing them with industrial training was an important one. The failure to observe this distinction in Clifden sometimes led to exploitation. Health/Hygiene

A complainant described the general state of cleanliness of the children as follows: They were filthy, black eyes, dirty clothes or torn clothes ... the hair was sore, and the fleas used to eat right through the hair, all scabbed. The children’s hair was full of scabs, full of sores, oozing and the filth and dirt and blood coming from the hair.

She said she never had a toothbrush in Clifden. The children washed their teeth with bread soda. They were bathed about once a month. There were two big baths, and the children queued up naked for their baths. She found this humiliating as she started to develop. The younger children went first and, while water was added at intervals, it was filthy by the time the last of the girls took their bath.

A witness from the mid-1960s said that the older children checked the younger children’s heads for lice and, if lice were discovered, the children were called dirty or filthy.

Head lice were a constant problem which was treated by putting a white powder in the child’s hair and by keeping the hair short. The Resident Manager, Sr Roberta, used to check their heads for lice and children whose heads were infested were beaten.

Another complainant, sent to Clifden at the age of 12 in the early 1960s stated that the children had to sit down every evening and inspect each other’s heads for lice.

A complainant remembered during the 1960s a lay worker cutting her hair in a very rough manner, leaving her with chunks of hair missing.

Every night, both boys and girls got undressed downstairs. They went up to bed in their underwear. She remembered feeling shy in front of the boys. They kept their nightdresses under their pillows. Each morning, they went downstairs to dress. She remembered always being cold.

A number of complainants stated that they received no information about menstruation or the facts of life. When their periods started, they depended on the older girls to explain what was happening. Girls left Clifden with little or no knowledge of adolescent development and the facts of life and were extremely vulnerable in the outside world. This fact should have been apparent to the Sisters who cared for them.

Sr Carmella gave evidence that the children kept their school clothes in the classroom, and changed before and after school. This was a practice that she had introduced, as the children used come to school late because they could not find items of clothing. They knitted their own jumpers and she helped them make their own skirts. They wore overalls over their clothes after school. The children’s hair was always clean and she never observed any children with lice.

There was undue emphasis on cleaning and polishing the premises of the Industrial School and far less emphasis on the personal cleanliness of the children. The lack of any proper preparation for menstruation was insensitive and amounted to neglect Bed-wetting

One complainant, who was resident in Clifden for 12 years from the late 1950s, stated that children who wet the bed at night did not have sheets. A rubber cover was put over the mattress. They were not permitted to wear nightclothes and slept naked. If they wet the bed, they were beaten. Their blanket would have to be washed that day and put back on the bed semi-dry.

Another former resident in Clifden from the age of 10, who was committed in the late 1950s and remained there until she was discharged at the age of 16, described how children who wet the bed were called ‘pissy beds’. One of the Sisters or a lay worker would make them wrap the wet sheets around them whilst they cleaned under their bed.