Local authority care still in the dark ages
There are so many stories out there about children being abused in care and many stories that have yet to be told. They range from the severe abuse of looked after children in children’s homes and institutions that were meant to care and protect them to severe abuse of children placed in foster care.
“Please, sir, I want some more.” Illustration by George Cruikshank- Oliver Twist
They all have something in common, the cover ups and ignorance by local authorities, staff, ministers, the insurance companies that represent the local authorities and various others who fail to understand the victims or survivors needs above their own agenda. This is a very painful experience for any victim as the pain is prolonged in the lengthy fight for justice and answers.
Throughout the 1900’s looked after children placed in local authority care and Church run homes across the UK Ireland and Jersey suffered the most horrendous abuses after being abused at home, taken into care for their own protection then re-abused in care system. The children’s vulnerability in these homes and institutions attracted the seediest of characters and paedophiles. It was and still is very much a problem today.
Kendall House isn’t different in it’s cover ups and it wasn’t any different to the abuse suffered in comparison to other homes and industrial schools, it wasn’t even different on the drug aspect because many children were being drugged left in the chemical cosh. It became a widespread problem for the looked after child in care as untrained staff and psychiatrists took to drugging children in order to make life easier for the staff.
Children were left seriously damaged in homes and institutions after being dragged to the floor by several members of staff for minor things. They were held down, sat on, restrained in methods that led to restrictions in breathing, injuries and sometimes the death of the child. No one listened to the children’s complaints because it became widely acceptable to drug and restrain them leaving children and parents complaints ignored by those caring for the looked after child with no one to turn too and very little rights if any at all.
Throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s looked after children became zombies because many homes and institutions were using drugs such as valium and Largactyl to quieten them (drug them up and shut them up). They were often seen shuffling around as they walked with their heads hung low in a trance induced state by the drugs administered to the child. Widely known as the chemical cosh children found themselves with no say on the barbaric drug regimes forced on them against their will and for no apparent reason other than to make life easier for the untrained staff. Consent was unlikely to of been given by the looked after child or their parents thus leaving many questions on the legality of the drugs used on children who mostly didn’t have mental health problems. Yet in most cases no proper diagnoses had been made. We would see terms written in files like “they might be developing an illness, they may potentially develop a mental illness, they have the potential to develop a personality disorder” and it was always maybe, might have, could have or possibly but very few had a diagnosed mental illness. Those who didn’t have one prior to be being drugged inevitably left care with a mental health issue because the drugs and combined regimes used on children in care altered them in a very negative way. Many looked after children also left care as addicts to those drugs.
Kendall House’s drug regime was very different to the chemical cosh and what happened behind those closed doors is still to come out in full. But that doesn’t mean that drugs used on children in care throughout wasn’t wrong because it was. Many survivors have reported being used in vaccine drug trials too. This practice was happening all over the world and several countries have now been exposed for drug research on looked after children.
When children leave the care system the damage is done and they are thrown into the big wide world and messed up from their negative experiences. Basic skills are taken away from them and many are left with the trauma caused by the abuse.
Today resources such as therapy are now so underfunded by government cut backs and long waiting lists that mean many victims and survivors can’t get help and support. The government has an obligation to provide these services but doesn’t. Many children are put into mental hospitals and lost in the system because the system has failed them, avoids dealing with the problems and refuses to deal with the abuse to looked after children and survivors who’s lives have been damaged by the very system that’s meant to care for them.
More problems have been created by the care system and those damaged by the failing system then leave care only to find that when they have children they then end up having to fight to prevent their children being taken away and their experience in care used against them by social services in the family courts.
Changes need to be made for all survivors of abuse and the governments need to address the growing problem of paedophilia and abuse within the care system as it is now so rife it’s almost like taking a child away from abuse at home and putting them into an organised care made brothel where children often become the play thing for sick and twisted staff/paedophiles
Industrial schools and looked after children are part of history and have been mentioned by many famous and historic authors such as Dickens. Children in care form a very important part of history as do the buildings but sadly the uncaring care system has not changed with time and is still very much in the dark ages.
Comments
Add a comment
Next entry: Court Culture: The Art of War
Previous entry: Family Court In The Act
On 17th Oct 2008 at 09:00 PM Martin John Petty said...
Kathy, the Government are a bit hypocritical even talking about how best to protect children. In order to best serve the the children of the future they should be “properly righting the wrongs they, and their so-called Constitution inflicted upon people like myself” - that is to say, Expunge all Illegal Convictions heaped upon children of tender years, 2 years 11 months, in my case, If they at least do that, then just maybe, people might actually believe that they are sincere in anything they now have to say about how best to protect children.
On a more personal note. I have raised 3 children, 2 my own and 1 adopted and I can tell you they are a joy to me. I have a Daughter, a University Graduate 2006, a Son, just gone into his second year studying Mechanical Engineering. I am one proud Father I can tell you. I think in spite of the terrible abuse I (and others) had to endure, I thank God that those people did not destroy my in built sense of compassion, I think that without that intact I might have ended up just another abused abusing others. I really feel sorry for abused people who ended up that way. Ireland’s’ Rulers who allowed this to happen, and are continuing to allow it to happen by not properly addressing the past, should be ashamed.
Regards
——- Original Message——
From: EDITED EMAIL DETAILS (PERSONAL)
To: EDITED PERSONAL EMAIL DETAILS
A RESPONSE TO THE LETTER BELOW
I trust Dr David Gwynn Morgan has a remit, as part of “Pathways into Institutions” (2) below, to investigate why it was necessary to commit the under 7 year olds to Industrial Schools via the courts under the guise of the 1908 Children’s Act, the State, the Judges and the directors of Industrial Schools fully knowing that they were riding roughshod over the rights of children not old enough, nor capable of committing such crimes, worse, unable to defend themselves, nor given any counsel, so to do. Is Dr David going to recommend that those children, such as I was, who were treated in this way are exonerated and their details deleted from District Court Minutes Books, further, are they to receive an apology for the wrongful, illegal acts bestowed upon them in direct breach of both the Irish Constitution 1937 and The International Convention of Human Rights 1950 and its Protocols? Or is Ireland and its current governors just going to do another
magic act, by sweeping this scandal under its carpets, as it has become so very good at doing up to now?
Martin John Petty
EDITED BY ADMIN PERSONAL ADDRESS
England Dated this 26th January 2008
Personal Stories/Opinions
May we refer to the article “Painful truth cannot be dismissed” by Patrick Walsh (Irish SOCA) in the Irish Independent dated 19th January 2008 in relation to the Ryan Commission?
On the 26th November 2005 the Ryan Commission spread the tentacles of its curiosity into the academic world, inviting University College Dublin to carry out a study of the long-term effects on those who were in the industrial school system.
The Ryan Commission overlooked its failure to give us the names of the “experts” from the University College Dublin until the 15th June 2006 who has been assisting the Ryan Commission with their research behind closed doors.
The names of the so called “experts” are as follows:
1. Mazars will examine funding in a number of institutions.
2. Professor David Gwynn Morgan will report on: (i) Historical background (ii) Pathways into institutions.
3. Professor Anthony Staines will examine health issues and health recording in institutions.
4. Professor Robbie Gilligan will examine relevant recent institutional history post the Kennedy Report and current issues in childcare with reference to making recommendations.
5. Mr. Ciaran Fahey, Chartered Engineer, will report on buildings in a number of institutions.
6. Mr. Patrick Brennan and Mr. Richard Rollinson are expected to furnish reports on general childcare issues to enable comparisons to be made historically and with reference to U.K experience.
7. Mr. Diarmaid Ferriter is expected to report on relevant historical issues.
8. Professor Alan Carr has been engaged to carry out a survey of a representative body of former residents of institutions.
It was undertaken without any consultation with the abused.
Contact was indirect, through their solicitors.
In a letter sent out by the Ryan Commission through lawyers to the abused on 16th November 2005, consent was sought for around 400 people who made applications to appear before the Justice Laffoy Confidential Committee to be included on the panel to be questioned in the research but overlooked its failure to involve people who made applications to appear before Justice Laffoy Investigation Committee before she resigned in September 2003, accusing the Government of failing to adequately resource the commission.
Closing date for this was the 25th November2005.
This gave virtually no time at all for consultation, though the more responsible solicitors were offering to answer questions.
As far as the Ryan Commission is concerned, the information about the study is extremely limited.
The Ryan Commission said that participation “will be subject to the usual confidentiality requirements”.
There is no “usual confidentiality”.
This was new territory.
The University College Dublin research represents a new departure.
With a research team engaged, the ability of the Ryan Commission to control confidentiality, or indeed any other aspect of procedure or content, is tenuous.
We believe that many people who were questioned in the research at that time rejected participation out of hand.
The Ryan Commission fails to understand how many people have our files they are held by the Department of Education, the Redress Board, the Ryan Commission, Barnardo’s, the archives of the religious institutions, the solicitors who have acted for us, or are acting for us, the psychiatrists and psychotherapists and the courts.
Now they want the University College Dublin to analyse around 400 people who made applications to appear before the Laffoy Confidential Committee but overlook their failure to include people who made applications to appear before the Laffoy Investigation Committee.
We cannot get our medical files from the religious institutions nor can we get the names of our families.
Back in November 2005 Professor Alan Carr, who lead the research team, assured the Ryan Commission that the interview material “will be securely stored at University College Dublin”, that details will remain confidential, and that the Human Research Ethics Committee has approved.
The heart of the matter lies in what is to be achieved.
The research will say how the overall group of participants were affected by having lived in an institution, how it affected their psychological adjustment, their quality of life and how individuals coped with the challenges that they faced during their time in the institutions and afterwards.
From the trust that we have built up over a number of years with several men and women who went through the industrial school system we can answer most of those questions.
Furthermore, we can say of that the Ryan Commission is not getting very close to the truth.
We fear the research project will do even less well.
Some leading spokespersons of the abused are disdainful and dismissive of the process altogether.
There is a further compelling reason for doubt about what is being done.
Though it is a long time ago, University College Dublin similar research lost all the research documentation.
This arose at the time of the Kennedy Committee’s work, in the late 1960s.
It was done because Ireland faced international disgrace as a result of OECD investigations into our education system.
These showed serious defects in the education levels of people in industrial schools.
Inmates were, of course, not being educated.
They were doing manual work for the Religious Orders, their education - like everything else - being seriously neglected.
Some regard this as the worst of all the abuses.
The University College Dublin researchers at the time knew none of this.
Perhaps Professor Alan Carr will give some thought to his predecessor in the research field, who was Professor of Logic and Psychology at University College Dublin, a Father Eamonn Feichin O’Doherty.
His research is referred to in Appendix F of the Kennedy (1970) Report.
His testimony hinged on the concept that the educational backwardness of industrial school inmates resulted from innate inability, bad blood, family circumstances.
It was not related to the conditions in the institutions.
Such was the Professor of Logic’s logic.
Moreover, he blamed early experience in life, not realising that the early life, from the age of two, had been in the industrial schools.
He ignored the prison environment, the constant fear, the brutality and violence, the starvation, the meagre and inadequate clothing.
Instead, it was all bad genes.
This was a piece of National Socialist research.
Current researchers can neither criticise nor defend these assertions because University College Dublin lost all the research material.
We do not think Professor Alan Carr should proceed any further assisting the Ryan Commission until questions have been asked about the project.
Apart from anything else it is appropriate to ask what psychiatric or therapeutic skills are possessed by the “experts” of his team.
We don’t know the timescale of the research but we think that the Ryan Commission should bring its work to an end since that work is going nowhere at all.
It is not satisfying many thousands of victims of institutional child abuse.
It is costing a great deal of public money.
Furthermore, it is not getting to the heart of truth.
Albert King on behalf of Mary King. (victim of institutional child abuse).
“JUST TWO OF MANNY ARTICLES I SUBMITTED AS A RESULT OF TREATMENT AT THE HANDS OF SO CALLED CARERS” I HAVE MANY STORIES OF INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS - WITNESSED AT FIRST HAND.
SOME DETAILS HAVE BEEN EDITED BY ADMIN TO PROTECT THE IDENTITIES OF THE EMAIL ADDRESSES AND PERSONAL ADDRESSES OF POSTEES
On 17th Oct 2008 at 11:30 PM Teresa said...
Hi Martin
It is awful when victims of abuse go onto abuse and many failures have we seen from the government that are supposed to protect us and dont. I have seen friends get a criminal record as babies and that has got to change. Being in care is not supposed to be a punishment on top of the abuse we have suffered.
I will address the rest of the post shortly
On 14th Dec 2008 at 11:48 PM Jonathan Yates said...
This happen to me take away from from my mum to be re abused by the care system that need change for care leavers while this mangers and staff have nice home and nice pay package to take home. kids in care are treat like dirty and let down. I did the complaint system was big let down.
On 4th Mar 2010 at 10:49 AM Robert Northall said...
Bernadette, I can feel your pain and your outrage in your writing, and I feel for you.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Religious orders profited for the abuse of people like yourself and my wife.
There is little doubt that funds would have been transferred from these Demonic Institutions to Rome and the “Holy See”; The Christian Brothers where and still are administered from Rome.
The “Holy See” is a corporation with a Soverign State and if they have profited from the abuse of the young of Ireland are culpable; as they should have made sure that the contributions that they accepted where clean and not covered in “SIN”.
But who is going to take the most powerful Corporation in the world to the “Court of Human Rights” Who can unlock the secrecy of this Corporation and gain access to their Financial Records.
The Irish Government have done their task well through the Redress Board in Minimising Compensation now all they seek is half of the cost for doing such a good job of ensuring silence at minimal cost the “Holy See”.
It is about time that the “Corporate and Religious Veil” was lifted.
Does anyone know a good Human Rights Lawyer?