- Volume 1
- Volume 2
-
Volume 3
- Introduction
- Methodology
- Social and demographic profile of witnesses
- Circumstances of admission
- Family contact
- Everyday life experiences (male witnesses)
- Record of abuse (male witnesses)
- Everyday life experiences (female witnesses)
- Record of abuse (female witnesses)
- Positive memories and experiences
- Current circumstances
- Introduction to Part 2
- Special needs schools and residential services
- Children’s Homes
- Foster care
- Hospitals
- Primary and second-level schools
- Residential Laundries, Novitiates, Hostels and other settings
- Concluding comments
- Volume 4
Chapter 9 — Record of abuse (female witnesses)
BackKnowledge of abuse
Those described as care staff and authority figures were religious and lay staff including care staff and ancillary workers in what witnesses understood to be positions of authority. Those referred to as Resident Managers refer to officers in charge and Reverend Mothers, understood by witnesses to be responsible for the management of the Schools.
The failure of staff to intervene when a resident was being abused was most often ascribed by witnesses to the culture of the School that allowed abuse to be an accepted part of life. This failure on the part of both religious and lay staff to exercise their authority and fulfil a duty of care and protection to the residents in their charge contributed to enduring anger, described by a number of witnesses. Two (2) witnesses reported that Sisters in charge of their School observed the sexually inappropriate behaviour of a local parish priest and advised them that this priest’s company should be avoided; the priest said Mass in the School and involved himself in the activities of the residents on a regular basis.
One hundred and fifteen (115) witnesses (30%) reported that they told someone, either a parent, relative, staff member, other adult or co-resident about being physically or sexually abused while they were resident in the Schools. These reports relate to 27 Schools identified to the Committee. The following table shows those to whom witnesses reported disclosing abuse during their admission. It indicates the number of reports made to each of the identified groups by the 115 witnesses.
To whom disclosed while resident | Number of reports |
---|---|
Parents and relatives | 50 |
Religious | |
- Staff | 32 |
- Resident Manager | 10 |
- Non-staff | 1 |
Lay | |
- Staff | 18 |
External professionals | |
- Medical staff | 7 |
- Garda Síochána | 7 |
- Social worker | 2 |
Co-residents | 21 |
Total | 148 |
As indicated, while the largest number of witness reports of disclosure were to parents and relatives, the Committee heard 61 reports of abuse being disclosed to the combined categories of religious and lay staff. In addition to the above information 21 witnesses reported telling co-residents about their abuse. One gave the following account of what happened following her disclosure: My uncle came in one day. I told him I was beaten, he complained to the authorities and they contacted Sr ...X.... She came into the class one day and that was my first public beating. She took my clothes off except for my knickers and my shoes and my socks. She said “can anyone see marks on this child?” and everyone said “no”, and then I got my first public beating. That became my punishment, a public beating ... with a stick.
Fourteen (14) witnesses gave accounts of the authorities in the School being spoken to and challenged about the abuse following disclosure to parents and relatives. As a result they were subsequently punished either by being beaten, denied family visits or ostracised from their peer group. Six (6) other witnesses gave reports of written complaints about the abuse being made by relatives, four of whom were granted early release from the School. The Committee heard accounts of other parents threatening legal action, including reports to the Gardaí or other authorities. In two instances parents did not return witnesses from weekend or holiday leave and no further action was taken. The Committee heard isolated accounts of parents being berated, placated and denigrated by religious staff whom they confronted with allegations of abuse.
Many witnesses reported being deterred from disclosing abuse for reasons including: threats of harm to themselves, their siblings or family, general fear and fear of further punishment, threats of being transferred to a more restrictive institution, the authority of an older person, bullying and the anticipated disbelief of others. ‘I couldn’t tell anyone, no one believed you, you were told to shut up.’ Forty nine (49) witnesses reported being told not to tell anyone about the abuse they experienced and were threatened with further abuse, or on occasion death, if they did. I remember her ...(mother)... saying “are they good to you?” Sr ...X... was outside the door and she came in and said “you have to go Mrs ...Y...”. I knew not to say ...(anything about being hit)... you would be beheaded, you would be afraid of your life to say what was happening to you.
Witnesses frequently described the prevailing climate of secrecy and denial in the Schools that acted as a further deterrent. A witness who had been sexually abused reported that she had never disclosed her abuse, in the belief that she would be sent to a laundry, as a co-resident had been. Witnesses who were sexually abused also reported that the threat of condemnation, being blamed for the abuse and the associated humiliation and shame were powerful disincentives to disclose abuse.
Witnesses discharged in more recent years reported that there were more opportunities to talk to external professionals and other adults about what was happening in the Schools, although they were not always believed and the subsequent interventions did not always have positive outcomes. Two (2) witnesses who were discharged by the mid-1980s said that their abuse was addressed by social workers. In one instance, following written representation by her grandmother, the witness was eventually moved to a different School by a social worker, where she reported she was happy. Another witness said that despite intervention by their social worker the abuse continued: I saw many social workers over the years, they were no help. The first one arranged to meet us in groups every 2 weeks, the first time we spoke about what was happening it went back to the nuns, something was said to them by the social worker and we got a beating. Subsequently we were seen with the nun present. I have seen the social work record, they took what nuns said as gospel, everything was from their perspective.
Witnesses reported different responses to their disclosures of abuse including being ignored, punished, disbelieved or protected. Positive action was also reported as taken by Residents Managers and others who investigated reports of abuse and in a number of instances dismissed or transferred staff who were found to have been abusive. Sixty eight (68) witnesses reported that their complaint received no response, that abuse was seen as part of the culture of the institution, was concealed, and continued. Thirty six (36) witnesses reported being beaten for disclosing that they were being physically or sexually abused. Thirty four (34) witnesses reported that their disclosures were dealt with in a positive manner and the abuse ceased.
The 36 witnesses who reported being punished for disclosing abuse described various means by which their disclosures were dealt with. In certain instances protective action was taken in addition to being punished, while in the majority of instances reported to the Committee punishment was the only known outcome of disclosure. I told another girl ...(about sexual abuse)... she told the nuns, 4 of them beat me, they said I had to go to Confession. I had to say it so loud so that she would hear me confess my sin, then she knew that I had confessed and they ...(four nuns)... said a chant over me. They decided a time and place to beat the devil out of you, they didn’t do it straight away, they made you wait. I always remember her saying ... “you’re a filthy Communist”, it was the time Kennedy ...(US President)... died. The priest didn’t give me any penance.
Other witnesses reported being removed or sent home following disclosure of abuse without any acknowledgement of what had occurred. I tried to escape once to tell the police what was going on. They locked all the shutters, they locked me up and told me “I’ll tell your mam to come and get you”. I wasn’t allowed eat with the kids for 3 weeks. I wasn’t allowed talk to the other girls. Then they made arrangements for me to go to my mam. They brought me to the airport. ... Sr ...X... and Sr ...Y... and she said “you mustn’t say anything about the School”.
A small number of witnesses reported that when they disclosed abuse by a religious person they were warned against identifying the abuser and forced to name another person. One witness reported that following a beating by a nun, who ‘always had a cane hanging out of her’, her hands were so swollen that she was unable to play the piano. The witness told her music teacher who was a member of the religious staff about the beating and the nun replied: ‘“She ...Sr X... didn’t, don’t ever say that. It was one of the older girls wasn’t it?” I was not let resume practice until I said it was an older girl’.
Positive outcomes of disclosure fell into two main categories: removal or admonishment of the reported abuser and protection of the witness from further abuse. ‘She ...(Sr X)... was taken out of there, then the beating stopped.’ There was a Sister there and she caught me eating the butter, I was so hungry. She caught my head and she banged it and banged it off the churn, and I remember putting my hand up and there was blood. The next thing I know was I woke up in bed and all the nuns were coming to see me and bringing me fruit, an apple and an orange, that I had never seen before. After that I got an easier time, and that nun was sent away. I never saw her again.
Eighteen (18) of the 38 witnesses who reported telling their parents that they were being abused and 17 other witnesses who reported abuse to authority figures within the Schools reported that their disclosures instigated positive and protective responses including the dismissal of abusive staff. Witnesses reported that disclosures of abuse to parents was more often believed, but that parental intervention did not always lead to a cessation of abuse. I did not get out of the bed for nearly 3 months ...(following severe beating)... and when I did I found it very hard to walk. The Reverend Mother came up to me after about 2 months and she said “...X... I know who did this.” I said “I’m not going to tell”. She said “I’ll say the name and then we’ll see about it, you don’t have to tell.” ... Sr ...Y...was gone out of the home after that, she was gone ... for a certain period ... she disappeared.
Following their disclosures of abuse 10 witnesses reported being protected from further abuse either by being moved to a different area in the School away from the reported abuser, being transferred from the School to a safe environment or being discharged. Two (2) other witnesses reported that less severe beatings from religious staff followed an intervention from their parents. One witness, who told a hospital nurse about being abused, had her hospital admission extended over the Christmas period. There was a change with a new Reverend Mother, she took a liking to me and I was like a pet, she took me in the parlour and gave me cake, it ...(sexual abuse)... all stopped then.
Footnotes
- A number of witnesses were admitted to more than one School, and made reports of abuse in more than one School, therefore the number of reports are greater than the number of witnesses.
- ‘Other Institutions’ – includes: general, specialist and rehabilitation hospitals, foster homes, primary and second-level schools, Children’s Homes, laundries, Noviciates, hostels and special needs schools (both day and residential) that provided care and education for children with intellectual, visual, hearing or speech impairments and others.
- For example: as witness evidence is presented according to the decade of discharge, a witness who spent 12 years in a school and was discharged in 1962 will have been included in the 1960s cohort although the majority of that witness’s experience will relate to the 1950s.
- Section 1(1)(a).
- In order to maintain confidentiality further details regarding the numbers of abuse reports in these Schools cannot be specified.
- Section 1(1)(b)
- One witness reported sexual abuse in more than one School.
- Section 1(1)(c) as amended by the section 3 of the 2005 Act.
- A number of witnesses were admitted to more than one School, and made reports of abuse in more than one School, therefore the number of reports are greater than the number of witnesses.
- In order to maintain confidentiality further details regarding the numbers of abuse reports in these Schools cannot be specified.
- Section 1(1)(d) as amended by section 3 of the 2005 Act.
- A number of witnesses were admitted to more than one School, and made reports of abuse in more than one School, therefore the number of reports are greater than the number of witnesses.
- In order to maintain confidentiality further details regarding the numbers of abuse reports in these Schools cannot be specified.