4,228 entries for Historical Context

Miss Clandillon, who drafted a memo within three weeks of the publication of the Report, dated 4th December 1970, stressed the need for additional staff, particularly qualified social work staff and the limitations of the existing system of training.186 She observed that: If it is agreed by the Departments concerned that the Department of Health should take over the children in Approved Institutions at present under the Department of Education it is inevitable that inquiries will be made as to the present social work staff both in the Department of Health and at local authority level. At present there are no social workers employed by the H.A.s in the following areas: Carlow, Kildare, Kilkenny, Longford, Roscommon, Leitrim, Sligo, Donegal, Monaghan, Laois, Offaly, Meath, Westmeath, Waterford, Wicklow, Tipperary (N.R.) and Tipperary (S.R.) In Counties Wexford, Limerick, and Cavan the Children’s Officers have no formal training in social work. This applies to some of the Children’s Officers employed by Dublin Health authority and to one of the Cork Health Authority staff. While most of these officers are doing valuable work it would be a great help to them if a course of in-service training were set up either by the Department of Health (on the lines of those organised by the Home Office in England) or else as an extra mural course run by the Department of Social Science at U.C.D. consideration would have to be given to practical work as well as lectures on various aspects of social work. For family case work it might be possible to arrange placements of one or two students at a time with the Family Welfare Bureau of the Catholic Social Service Conference which arranges training for social science graduates during their post-graduate training. Practical experience of adoption placements and procedures might possibly be arranged, again for one or two at a time, with the Catholic Protection and Rescue Society, South Anne St., Dublin, which is the only registered adoption society in the country having sufficient trained staff. On the other hand, it might be found more convenient to send the few C.O.’s concerned to Britain for a training course. In areas where Public Health Nurses are working with deprived children this arrangement should be dropped and in these areas, listed above, qualified social workers should be appointed as soon as possible.

Clandillon further argued that additional staff would be required in the Department of Health and that each social service department should not exceed that of the country areas, and within each department: there should be a qualified Senior Social Workers, with post-graduate qualifications and experience...who would direct and co-ordinate the work of the other social workers so that the most appropriate member of the staff would take over each case and thus avoid overlapping and waste of time and personnel. A weekly case conference should be held but the Senior Social Worker should be available for consultation in any case of particular difficulty. She should also supervise all initial placements of children whether for boarding-out or adoption.

In relation to the Adoption Board, Clandillon noted that ‘it is a matter of concern that only a small number of their welfare officers is qualified in social work and a recent advertisement in the daily press for further officers for adoption, probation and prison welfare work equates qualified with unqualified staff. At the present time I would not consider the Board a suitable agency to take people seconded for in-service training’. She further noted that she thought ‘it unlikely that the Department of Justice will agree to the inclusion of the Adoption Board and its officers under a new Children’s Department though this could be of benefit to the children to be adopted’.

In more general terms, Clandillon suggested that when responsibility was transferred to the Department of Health: All the remaining Industrial Schools and the two Reformatories should be visited to ascertain the numbers of committed children and the reasons for committal. All the information possible should be collected on each child, including psychological test results in cases of doubt. The normal children who have no marked disturbance or behavioural problems should be placed as soon as possible with suitable relatives or foster parents. Both categories should be asked to take the children on a boarded-out basis. They should get supportive help from a social worker in helping the children to integrate into the family. Disturbed children and members of families who are being kept together will require special study. Some emotionally disturbed children will be better cared for in small units for such children where the close ties and demands of small family would be too much for them. They should have psychiatric help and the support of a highly qualified social worker. The ground work done in this field should be of benefit to the new departments as they set up and form the basis from which to work towards the integration of more children into the community.

In addition, she argued that: the takeover of the children at present under the Department of Education should run quite smoothly in areas where there are good Children’s Officers. In other areas appointments of qualified and experienced social workers should be made as quickly as possible. These areas would need special help and consideration from the Inspector(s) of the Department at first but the Senior Social Worker could always keep in touch if any difficulty arose. It would be valuable to have a seminar for all the staff of the new departments here in the Department of Health to discuss the most efficient way to keep records and personal files, and so on, so that a similar pattern of organisation would be adopted in each region and in the county area offices throughout the country.

Clandillon envisaged the replacement of the large industrial schools with small group homes, housed in ordinary houses designed for family living in cities and towns. Again, ideally, the house should be run by married couples, the husband going out daily to his work and the wife doing the running of the home. It may be difficult to get sufficient numbers of married couples who would be interested in this work. It has been remarked that breakdown in child care of this kind may occur if the couple has children of their own in the pre-teenage group. It would be more useful, therefore, to look for couples whose families are grown up so that there is no conflict between the couple’s children and those entrusted to their care. If such couples are found they should be encouraged to meet each other from time to time in the presence of the appropriate social worker to discuss any problems.

On 13th January 1971, the Irish branch of the Association for Child Psychology and Psychiatry provided the Department with their observations on the report. In a letter they stated: It would appear that the Committee of Enquiry, although stating in its opening remarks that it intended to cover the whole field of Child Care, did not, in fact, do so. There is no definition of what percentage of the population is under discussion and there is no indication of what percentage of children require care. Although generally stating that reform is needed, the whole effect of the criticisms, which are many and entirely substantiated by our experience, is unstructured, failing in total impact and unconnected. The specific problem of four systems of central governmental control is not tackled satisfactorily. We would support the proposition that responsibility for all aspects of Child Care be transferred to the Department of Health and, furthermore, we would consider that ideally one department should be responsible for the whole system under review. The lack of an adequate system of Social Administration and the lack of an establishment for social workers within central and local government prevents any improvement or action on foot of the Committee of Enquiry’s proposals. Social workers are of vital importance to adequately gather and access knowledge of the child and his family before ‘care’ is instituted and assisting in adequately ‘paving the way’ on this charge. The inadequacy of present ‘would be’ social workers is perpetuating the naïve concept of Child Care and fails to recognize the developmental aspects of the child and his family.

The letter concluded by stressing the grave concern of the Association that: the many excellent recommendations for reform and improvement in the Child Care System contained on the Committee of Enquiry’s Report will not be acted upon or acted upon in a piece-meal fashion. It is obvious that a new Children’s and Families Bill should be presented to the Dáil. In furtherance of the objectives of the Committee of Inquiry’s Report, my committee is of the opinion that there is urgent need for a government established Commission of Enquiry into the present Child Care System and allied areas of Social Service.

The Protestant Child Care Association also replied to the Department of Education on 13th January 1971. They welcomed the report and pressed for the speedy implementation of the recommendations. They also made a number of recommendations not included in the Committee of Enquiry’s report. These were: revise law on minimum age of criminal responsibility; age of criminal responsibility to be school leaving age; no corporal punishment in any establishment; part-time crash courses for senior staff; hostel provision for handicapped; protect the retarded; fine for fund for family service as addition to maintenance orders for absconding husbands; treatment advisory panel for juvenile court.

They concluded by stating ‘We are strongly against placing the institutional Child into further institutions.’

Comhairle le leas Oige187 responded to the report on 14th January 1971 and stated: We welcome the report and whole heartedly agree with the recommendations made by the Committee of Enquiry into the Reformatory & Industrial School System. We are especially pleased to note that the Committee recognises the need for specially trained personnel in this field and recommends a break from the institutional to small group unit as a basis for an adequate system of child care.

The Protestant Adoption Society also replied on 14th January 1971, and opened their letter by stating, ‘In general this is a superb report’. However, they also noted: the only reference of consequence to non Roman Catholic children is contained in paragraph 1.5 on page 3.188 With this one paragraph the Committee appears to dismiss any further responsibility for non Roman Catholic Children. Although this paragraph so far as it applies to the rest of the Country may be correct, it is certainly not true of Cork. The position in Cork is that cases are referred by the Local Gardaí and the Inspector of the I.S.P.C.C. first to the Pastor of the child’s religious denomination and / or to a layman and it is only when they fail adequately to deal with the case that it is likely to come before the Courts. However, very few non Roman Catholic children are ever brought before the Courts in Cork. The Authorities have long since learned that this is a completely fruitless exercise. They know only too well that since there is no Institution to which a child in need of care can be committed the Courts are powerless to take any effective action in the matter. The result is that these children are permanently deprived of the right guaranteed by the Constitution to the same treatment as their peers. Whilst I recognise that the smallness of the number involved creates special difficulties it is not good enough for the Committee to sweep the problem under the carpet. If, however, the Committee’s excellent recommendation to replace Industrial Schools by small residential homes containing not more than seven to nine children is implemented, then the problem of non Roman catholic Children should be simple to solve.

The letter went on to comment that the report noted the link between young female offending and prostitution, but that they ‘noted with some alarm however the first recommendation of the Committee on page 45 that a closed psychiatric unit for their treatment should be provided’. The letter writer, Mr John B Jermyn conceded that he may have misinterpreted the intention behind the recommendation, but that if it meant that: they should all be locked up in some special form of mental Asylum than I heartily disagree with it. However I cannot think that the present homes which mostly seem to be run by Religious Orders are adequate to deal with the problem however good the intentions of the people who run them. I cannot think that a life of prayer and penance is an adequate substitute in the minds of a young prostitute for thee rewards of her profession. Experience has shown that Alcoholics Anonymous saves more people from alcoholism than all the Doctors and Psychiatrists put together. This is so because the alcoholics know they are being helped by others who have suffered the same torments as themselves. While I do not suggest by analogy that young prostitutes can be saved by ex-prostitutes neither do I believe that they can be rescued by professional Virgins. There must be a more reasonable solution than either permanent penance or incarceration in Asylums.

In relation to after-care, the letter complimented the report on the excellent recommendations noting: It is ludicrous to assume that a child brought up in the protective atmosphere of an Institution is capable of looking after himself at the age of 16. Even a well adjusted boy of this age with a sound and happy family background is not capable of doing so and must rely for some time upon the help and advice of understanding parents. The child from an Industrial School, unless he is extraordinarily lucky in his first placement, has no chance whatever of succeeding. The present failure rate is horrifyingly high.

The letter also argued that: There can be no doubt that it is far better for a child to be placed in a suitable foster home than in an Industrial School. However, the emphasis must be on the word suitable. In adoption cases the Adoption Board insists on a proper investigation of the home background and general suitability of the proposed adopting parents and ensure so far as it possible that the proposed adopting parents are of approximately the same social standing as the child’s natural parents. No less stringent enquiry should be made in the case of foster parents. It is a sad fact that the Cork Health Authority which is so excellent in every other respect falls down very badly indeed in this particular matter. Details of some of the more disastrous cases can be made available if required.