BELOW IS THE EXTRACT FROM THE RYAN REPORT THAT NAMES AN INNOCENT PERSON/SURVIVOR AND GIVES BOTH THE FORENAME AND THE SURNAME OF THIS PERSON. WHILE THE PERPETRATORS OF THE MOST HEINOUS CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN ARE PROTECTED BY PSEUDONYMS THE SAME ANONYMITY IS NOT AFFORDED TO A PERSON PUT INTO AN INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL AS A BABY.
To protect the identity of this person, I’ve deleted anything that could identify her.
As one of many case-studies on this topic, consider **** who was committed to an Industrial School on 13th April 1935 by order of the District Court pursuant to the Children Act 1908. The reason given was that she was destitute.
The District Court directed that she remain within the Industrial School system until she reached the age of 16. Since her age at the time the order was made was 23 months, she spent 14 years of her life in Industrial Schools. In relation to the manner in which she was placed within the Industrial School system her major complaint is that in so doing the State criminalised her. She is of the view that she was charged, tried and convicted by a criminal court, which sentenced her to 14 years in prison (she was aged 23 months at the time of her committal). The words she uses in her various letters are that she was ‘charged,’ with being destitute, ‘found guilty’ and ‘sentenced to 14 years in one of Ireland’s penal institutions’. She has consulted the court records and they have reinforced her in this view. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has stated that she was not convicted of any offence and furthermore that she could not have been in view of her age and the fact that she was involved in care proceedings.
Continue reading »
