Chapter 5 — Interviews

Boys’ Industrial and Reformatory Schools

Severe beatings were often associated with allegations of impurity or masturbation, which was also common across all of the schools.

In addition to punishment for offences either trivial or grave, there was the added fear created by punishments administered for no apparent reason. Interviewees recalled being called out of the classroom or being taken out of the dormitory and being beaten without any explanation. This made it impossible to avoid punishment and many recalled a sense of constant fear. As one man stated ‘You got hit for nothing’.

Religious staff members were described as volatile and unpredictable by some complainants: ‘He would fly off the handle a lot’; ‘he was a bully’; ‘he was a vicious man’ and some were described as being obsessed with immorality and sex. One or two Brothers were described as smelling of alcohol when they beat the boys.

There were some differences in the way in which physical punishment was administered across the different schools. In some schools boys were stripped and beaten across the back and buttocks with leather straps for fairly trivial offences. In other schools such punishments were rarer although there were instances of severe, almost ritualistic beatings in almost all schools.

Absconding was treated as a very serious offence in all schools and usually attracted the most severe punishment. In all cases, boys who absconded were punished and in almost all cases this punishment took the form of severe physical beatings with a leather or a cane. Head shaving was reported by some interviewees in some schools.

Punishments were usually administered either in the presence of or within the hearing of other boys. One interviewee recalled a boy being taken out of the classroom and being savagely kicked and beaten by a Brother. He said that he could actually hear the punches and kicks and the boy crying for the Brother to stop.

There was no evidence from the interviews that any attempt was made to hide or disguise the fact that severe beatings were administered. On the contrary, many recalled the fear and terror of seeing and hearing these beatings: ‘the whole class went silent and could hear what was going on’.

Boys who were in these schools in the late 1970s reported less systemic abuse but could still recall incidents of severe corporal punishment either directed at them or other boys.

The most common implement reported for inflicting punishment was the leather strap. In nine out of the 10 schools covered by this category, it was the norm to receive blows with the leather on the hands or the buttocks. A number of interviewees stated that there were coins stitched into these straps and some recalled a larger heavier strap as well as a smaller one. One teacher was described as having a special stick made. There was no consistency as to the number of strokes and it appeared to depend on the individual teacher.

Other implements, such as hurleys, canes, chair legs and dowels, were mentioned as well as fists and feet.

Sexual abuse by members of staff was alleged in respect of all the schools in this category. The number of persons alleging abuse varied from over 50 percent of complainants in some schools to 10 percent in others. In most schools the range was between 30 and 40 percent of complainants interviewed.

Sexual abuse, where it was perpetrated by staff members, followed similar patterns. The boy was usually alone with the perpetrator, and the abuse, which ranged from inappropriate touching to rape, was usually conducted in a way that made the boy fearful of a beating if he resisted. Boys were instructed to tell no-one about what occurred and they felt they had no option but to stay silent. There were some reports of staff offering kinder treatment to boys they had singled out for sexual abuse. One interviewee said that although he knew that what the Brother who abused him was doing was wrong, he tolerated it because it made him feel special and loved in the school. He said the Brother would give him treats and watch out for him and he never blamed the Brother for what he did to him. It was a matter of survival for him.

In general, however, witnesses alleged that sexual abuse was conducted in a random and impersonal manner. The boy did not appear to matter a great deal and there appeared to be no communication or affection shown to him by the perpetrator. This was one of the more striking aspects of sexual abuse in boys’ institutions. In most cases, even where boys alleged that they were assaulted over a long period by a particular Brother, there was no evidence that any kind of ‘relationship’ built up.

Boys who were sexually abused felt ashamed and did not discuss what had occurred with their fellow pupils. Interviewees reported seeing boys coming out of Brothers’ rooms looking distressed, but they did not discuss what had happened even though they, the onlookers, were aware that the boys had been abused. The secrecy enforced by threats by the perpetrator was reinforced by shame and humiliation on the part of the victim and the boys themselves.

In a handful of cases, the victims reported abuse to the management of the school. These complaints usually resulted in a beating and nothing was done to prevent the abuse. In some cases the interviewees said that the alleged perpetrator was transferred although they did not know if there was any connection with their complaint and the transfer.