10,992 entries for Inspections - State

As noted in section 1, the 1990s saw the establishment of a number of ‘high support’110 and ‘special care residential units’.111 In October 2005, there were 141 children’s residential centres, classified in descending order as either community based children’s residential services (93); hostels (14); high support (11); special arrangements (12); other (9) and special care unit (2).112 Reasonably detailed data113 is available for 2005, which shows that of those in residential care, 57 percent are in the old Eastern Regional Health Authority (ERHA) area or, in other words, the greater Dublin region. Since the 1970s, for most years in excess of half the children in residential care were in this functional area.

Although the decline in residential care was as equally dramatic as the decline in foster care in the late 1960s – early 1970s, the numbers in residential care have continued to decline, whilst foster care has shown a dramatic increase over the past 30 years.114 The number of children in foster care increased from less than 1,500 in 1970 to over 4,500 by 2006. Part of the reason for the sustained increase in foster care is the decline in the number of children available for adoption.

The total number of children in Special Schools has dropped substantially over the past 35 years, from 255 in 1971 to a mere 80 in 2005. This drop has been particularly pronounced over the past decade.115 One of the possible reasons for the decline in the numbers in Special Schools, particularly in recent years, is the numbers of young people dealt with under the Diversion Scheme operated by An Garda Síochána, with the number of young people cautioned under the scheme rising from less than 7,000 in the early 1990s to nearly 17,000 by 2007.116 Whilst the number of children in residential care declined rapidly from the early 1970s, the number of young people committed on conviction to prisons and places of detention, having hit an all time low of 179 in 1963, increased each year until the early 1970s. The numbers declined and then stabilised until the late 1980s, when the numbers exceeded 800, but dropped rapidly to just fewer than 500 in 1991. The numbers then more than doubled to over 1,200 in 2001, and then once again declined to just over 800 in 2005, but increased in 2007 to 1,053.117 Young people now represent just over 16 percent of all committals on conviction, compared to 27 percent in the early 1970s. In terms of gender, female committals have declined from a high of nearly 15 percent of all committals under 21 to just fewer than 4 percent in 2005.118

Patterns in the provision of care for children have changed dramatically since the foundation of the Irish State. In general there has been an overall increase in the number of children in care over the past 35 years both in raw numbers and as a proportion (per 1,000 young people under 18), indicating a real growth in the number of children in care not attributable to a mere shift in demographic patterns. Residential care, once the dominant form of substitute care for children in the State, has been eclipsed by the use of foster care.119 Changes in legislation combined with an increase in the number of social workers and greater awareness of the needs of children have contributed to this situation. The number of children in Special Schools for Young Offenders, in particular, has decreased substantially over the past 35 years, while the number of young people (under 21) in prisons and places of custody have increased and decreased intermittently over the same period. It is worth noting the considerable challenges to the collation and interpretation of the figures presented here. Substantial variations in nomenclature, definitions and counting rules combined with a lack of detailed statistics and the transfer of responsibility between departments make what should be a rather straightforward exercise (mapping trends in the care of children over a relatively short 35-year period) into an arduous task.120

In 1965, in a report on social research in Ireland conducted by a United Nations Advisor to the Irish Committee on Social Research, included in the research needs identified the necessity for a ‘survey of children in institutions with a particular view to the reason for their institutionalization’ and ‘research into the methods of institutional and educational treatment and its effects’.121 In the same year, a survey team appointed by the Minister for Education to examine the Irish education system reported. In an appendix to the report they made reference to the Reformatory and Industrial Schools. In relation to the post-school career of those who left the schools, the survey team noted: it seems desirable to improve the placement service, perhaps by providing the schools with more information on employment opportunities. Efforts might also be made to improve the degree of supervision maintained during the two years after release. This is difficult but the provision of hostel accommodation (or of other suitable accommodation where the numbers did not warrant a hostel) would be a help in this regard.122

The survey team also noted the decline in the number of children in the schools and that most schools were operating under their capacity. While noting that the under-utilisation of schools could be viewed as an economic burden, the team also put forward the view that there was: an argument for tolerating rather more schools than the numbers would seem to warrant, on the grounds that schools of this type should be fairly small in order to maintain a personal relationship with each child. Also children should not be too far away from their parents and relatives – these schools are fairly widely scattered over the whole country. Nevertheless, it might be desirable to examine the possibility of closing some, particularly as the numbers in care have been declining fairly steadily in recent years.123

More generally, the publication in 1966 of the White Paper on Health Services and their Further Development125 paved the way for a new administrative structure for the delivery of medical and health services in Ireland, including community care services, which in turn were to deliver social work services and particularly childcare services, within a system of regionalised health boards, thus replacing the existing county-based system. Although 1965 is taken as the starting point for this paper on the basis that a consensus was clearly emerging as to the desirability for shifting the focus of the child welfare system and the limitations of the existing system of residential care, a number of reports prior to this date had highlighted these issues. A non-exhaustive list includes the Commission on Youth Unemployment126 (1951), the Report of Joint Committee on Vandalism and Juvenile Delinquency127 (1958), Captain Peader Cowan’s pamphlet on Reformatory and Industrial Schools (1960) 128 and the Inter-departmental Committee on the Treatment of Crime and Prevention of Delinquency (1962).129 For many commentators, it was the publication of a report by the think-tank Tuairim that hastened the process of change in this area.130

The London branch of the organisation produced this report, published on 12th January 1966. The core recommendation of the branch was that: the 1908 Children Act has out-lived its usefulness and that it should be superseded by an entirely new Children Act which would take into account the present needs of Irish society and contemporary theory and methods of child care and protection.

In addition, the report recommended that: All child care services should be co-ordinated in a single government department which would administer a subsidiary children’s department. We have considered the claims of the Department of Education, the Department of Health, the Department of Justice and the Department of Social Welfare and have concluded that the Department of Health would be the most appropriate department to undertake this work...131

The Tuairim Report also examined private voluntary homes for children, noting that there were 23 homes that they were aware of, 13 managed by religious Orders, catering for nearly 1,000 children. They noted that the informal system by which children were admitted to these homes had the advantage of bypassing the courts system, but that the danger existed that ‘illegitimate children may be dumped and conveniently forgotten’ there.132 In commenting on the Tuairim report, the Reformatory and Industrial Schools branch of the Department of Education observed: ‘It seems on the whole to have been compiled objectively though marred by a cheap jibe and untrue jibe at Irish.’133 The Department acknowledged that the system was in need as a complete overhaul and that: ...the majority of the faults found with the reformatory and industrial schools system are soundly based and confirmed by my experience. They highlight the necessity for a complete review and overhaul of the entire system in operation for the care of children who lack proper guardianship, including delinquents, many of whom such as families of distressed mothers and widows could be better cared for at less expense to the state without splitting up the family. The low grants given to these institutions compare very unfavourably with those given in most, if not all other European countries and pressure for increased grants in recent years has come mainly from the conductors of the boys’ schools as the majority of the girls schools are conducted by communities who engage in other activities the gains from which offset the losses on industrial schools. Virtually all the convent schools are will-nigh excellent, the glaring defect in the senior boys’ schools being the lack of the female hand in the domestic service. In the whole system the most serious defect is the absence of official after-care machinery. Secondly the operation of the domestic services in the senior boys schools should be undertaken by nuns or female lay staff.

One of inspectors of boarded out children134 in the Department of Health, Miss Clandillon135, in her review of the Tuairim report, although claiming that the report reflected some ‘muddled and out-moded thinking’ was broadly positive stating that: there are some sound recommendations in the Report. Everyone concerned with the welfare of deprived children would agree with the view that a new Children Act should supersede the present fragmented legislation and widen its scope.136

The Commission of Inquiry on Mental Illness, published the same year as the Tuairim Report, recommended that ‘that the whole problem of industrial schools should be examined’ and regarded the ‘term industrial as applied to these schools, as obsolete and objectionable’.137 In the same year a series of articles appeared in the Irish Times, written by Michael Viney. He argued in the articles: (a) That most juvenile offences in the Republic are rooted in social conditions: urban poverty and overcrowding, deprivation and inadequate family welfare; (b) that the children’s courts have lost faith in an out-dated and money-starved system of institutional care; (c) that probation, as an alternative has been emasculated by lack of training, lack of staff and overwork; (d) that in the piecemeal partnership between two Government departments and a variety of religious orders and agencies, proper liaison and aftercare is virtually unknown; (e) That vital psychological and psychiatric aspects of the juvenile problem are getting only token attention.138

On 11th November 1966, Dr CE Lysaght submitted a report on Industrial Schools and Reformatories to the Minister for Education, Mr Donagh O’Malley. Commissioned by Mr George Colley, the previous Minister for Education. Dr Lysaght outlined that: his personal instruction by word of mouth was not to confine myself to the purely medical and physical condition of the children but to go into and report on their environmental conditions which have a direct or indirect effect on their well-being and health, physical and mental.

In his general report, he outlined that: the most striking feature is of course the diminishing numbers in the schools over recent years which has resulted in the closing of many schools already. Manifestly this downward trend will result in the closure of more. An unfortunate result of this downward trend is the creation of uncertainty as to the future of the schools and consequent hesitation on the part of religious orders to undertake works of improvements involving any notable expenditure.

Despite questioning the managers as to the reasons underlying the decline in numbers, Dr Lysaght claimed that he could obtain no conclusive result and that it seemed the result of a number of factors. He went on to state: Legal adoption has been given as a cause but all agreed the numbers involved could not account for the marked fall. Another reason given and also accepted as welcome was increased earnings and consequent increased standard of living among the poorer classes. Emigration of whole families of the poorer class to Great Britain was also considered a factor. The boarding out of children by Local Authorities was also mentioned. Nobody appears in a position to indicate its extent in their area but many considered its worth had been greatly exaggerated and were critical as regards boarded out children they had received in their schools....In many schools, Managers and nuns were cynical as regards Local Authorities and said their officials would prefer to send children to any sort of home rather than to the industrial schools and in fact had taken children from industrial schools without assigning any reason and placed them in homes. ...There were also statements made that some District Judges, no matter how bad the circumstances, would not commit children to these schools and they had a wrong conception of them. On inquiry I found that in only very few instances had District Judges visited these schools. It would seem therefore their knowledge of them was obtained second-hand and is hearsay which they would not themselves accept in Court as evidence.