Chapter 13 — Special needs schools and residential services

Sexual abuse

Two (2) male witnesses from one facility reported that male religious staff who were sexually abusive would select them and other residents to accompany them on outings to town where they were taken into pubs and given alcohol. One witness reported being taken by a Brother to a pub instead of the cinema and returning to the cinema before the film finished. This Brother was reported to have sexually abused the witness on a regular basis over a three-to four-year period.

One witness named a man by whom he was sexually abused. He was a member of the public who had access to the grounds of the intellectual disability service, and who befriended the witness in the course of his activities there: He ...(X)... asked me to meet him one night outside. ... I got out the window and I met him down the way, he came out in his car and he made sure there was nobody looking and he asked me to get in. He was doing his usual thing on the way across ... (touching witness).... I thought he was bringing me home but we ended up in a Bed and Breakfast. ... By that stage I knew what he was doing was wrong. He took my clothes off ... he just did what he wanted to do to me ... (witness described anal penetration).... He said if I ever told anybody he’d get me, he’d know where I was. ... He left me home to my parents’ place, they were waiting outside the door, he walked up and said “I found your son, he was walking the streets, I picked him up”. ... He never told them anything about what he’d done. ... (Witness never saw abuser again)....

The individuals identified as sexually abusive came from a wider range of occupations both within and outside the institutions, than those reported as physically abusive, and almost half of those reported as sexually abusive were co-residents.

There were 28 staff, 26 male and two female, identified by witnesses as being sexually abusive, including 19 who were named. Seventeen (17) of the named staff members were male and two were female. Thirteen (13) of those named were religious staff and six were lay care staff and ancillary workers. One male religious staff member was specifically described as the person in charge. The other religious staff were described as being in care roles at the time of the abuse although their assigned roles were not always clear to the witnesses.

There were a further nine reports of sexual abuse by religious and lay staff where the reported abusers were not identified by name. They were described by their role as Brothers, night watchmen and care staff. It is possible that there is some overlap between those staff who were identified by name and those who were not named.

Two (2) Brothers were identified by name as sexually abusive by six separate witnesses and three other Brothers were each identified by name by two separate witnesses. A further 14 other religious and lay staff were each the subject of single reports of sexual abuse.

The following table lists the number of named and unnamed sexual abusers, by their reported position:

Position of reported sexual abusers	Males	Females
Religious
- Authority figure	1	0
- Care staff	16	0
- Teacher	1	0
- Ancillary workers	1	0
- External clergy	1	0
Lay
- Care staff	1	1
- Ancillary worker	6	1
Visiting professional	1	0
Weekend or holiday placement carer	1	0
Volunteer worker	1	0
General public	1	0
Co-resident	23	4
Total	54	6

Twelve (12) witnesses identified 16 co-residents by name as sexually abusive. One co-resident was identified by name by three witnesses. There were a further 11 reports of sexual abuse by co-residents who were not named. In five instances witnesses reported being frequently sexually abused by co-residents over a period of years. As with staff members, there may be some overlap between those co-residents who were named as abusers and those who were not specifically named.

Those reported as sexually abusive included three groups of male co-residents who were described as threatening and physically intimidating in addition to being sexually abusive. Two (2) witnesses described being assaulted by groups of co-residents who restrained them and subjected them to penetration by objects. As witness information regarding the precise numbers of abusive co-residents is incomplete the numbers reported above could be considered an under-representation.

In addition to staff members and co-residents who were reported as sexual abusers there were five witness reports of sexual abuse being perpetrated by the following male adults who were external to the institution: a visiting GP, a chaplain, a father in a ‘holiday’ family, a male member of the public, and a volunteer worker who took residents out to the cinema. There was a man ... (member of the public)... he used to watch me, he was always a bit of a loner. ... He came across me one day when I was alone and he invited me into ... (the)... shed and he started touching me. It happened on 3 occasions. He wasn’t part of the staff but he used to use the facilities. To begin with he used to just touch me, then he removed my clothes. ... There was a dirty mattress and he pushed me down and he got on top of me, he was pushing himself up and down on top of me, he had his clothes off. I didn’t really understand what he was doing. • When I was taken out... (by holiday family)... I was abused, I was sexually abused, it was a man... (father in holiday family).... I was sent out nearly every weekend and holidays and it went on for years and years of my life...distressed...I can’t get over it, it just gets to me. I was 7 years of age.

Neglect

Failure to care for the child which results, or could reasonably be expected to result, in serious impairment of the physical or mental health or development of the child or serious adverse effects on his or her behaviour or welfare.7 This section summarises witness accounts of general neglect. Descriptions of neglect refer to all aspects of the physical, social and emotional care and welfare of the witnesses. It also describes other forms of neglect that are regarded as having a negative impact on the individual’s emotional health and development, for example failure to protect from harm, to educate and to adequately supervise.

There were 25 reports of neglect heard by the Committee from 13 male and 12 female witnesses in relation to 11 special needs schools; three of the schools were the subject of reports by both male and female witnesses. Sixteen (16) reports were related to witnesses’ experiences in schools for children with sensory impairments. Six (6) schools were the subject of between two and seven reports, totalling 20 reports. Five (5) schools were each the subject of single reports.

The forms of neglect reported to the Committee included inadequate education and training, poor and insufficient food, poor hygiene, lack of recreational activities and inadequate supervision.

Eleven (11) witnesses identified poor supervision as a source of neglect in the schools where they were placed. One witness described being sexually abused by a member of religious staff at night in his bed although a Brother had supervisory duties in the dormitory and ‘was there in a flash if you whispered to another boy’. Nine (9) witnesses, both male and female, reported being physically and sexually abused by staff and co-residents in circumstances where there was no effective supervision. Witnesses also reported being abused by groups of co-residents in circumstances where there was no available protection and where older residents had unsupervised access to younger, vulnerable residents.

Witnesses described making various attempts to protect themselves or seek protection from others. One witness who was sexually abused by a co-resident was separated from the abusive co-resident by care staff to whom he had disclosed the abuse. This resulted in an improvement in his situation until the following year when there was a change of staff and he was once again placed in proximity to the person who had previously abused him. He was once again abused on a regular basis for some time by that person. Another witness reported being repeatedly sent to a holiday family where she was sexually abused, despite her protests that she did not want to return there. She believed that staff should have responded to her indications that she was unhappy although she felt unable to articulate that she was being sexually abused.