DOCUMENT 5
Visit to Australia in March 1995
undertaken by Canon Christopher Fisher
and Mrs Mary Gandy on behalf of the
Catholic Child Welfare Council and the
Bishops' Conference of England & Wales
TO REPORT ON THE CURRENT SITUATION WITH REGARD
TO FORMER
CATHOLIC CHILD MIGRANTS AND TO RESEARCH THEIR
CURRENT NEEDS
Part 1—Western Australia (Reduced version
of the report)
OVERVIEW AND
PURPOSE OF
THE VISITThis
visit to Australia was the result of a growing realisation that
first-hand knowledge of the former child migrant issue was an
absolute necessity if CCWC was to be a position to respond appropriately
to tracing enquiries and to have a proper perspective on current
issues.The first part of the visit concentrated on Western Australia
because the majority of former Catholic child migrants were placed
in institutions there and most of the difficulties that have been
expressed appear to be in Western Australia.
OUR PERCEIVED
EXPECTATIONSFrom the background
information we had read, from various accounts and publications
and from the meetings held in the UK, we believed that discussions
would be concentrated on:1. Migration: (a) How decisions
had been made; how children were chosen; and who should take responsibility
for the migration scheme. (b) Access to information including
tracing, identity, and finding family.2. Conditions: prevailing
physical conditions at the time and child care practice compared
with present standards.3. Abuse: allegations of physical
and sexual abuse in the institutions and of harsh and cruel treatment.4.
Litigation: cases being brought in Australia by angry former
child migrants and other former residents of the institutions
who claim abuse in the homes; some of these litigants would also
claim that their views had not been acknowledged, their experiences
had been denied and help had not been offered when their needs
were presented.
WHAT WE
FOUNDWe attempted to approach
all known avenues of information by arranging meetings with as
many people as possible who had a connection or interest in the
former child migrant issue.There was universal agreement that
the primary responsibility for the migration lies with Governments,
both Australian and British. We found mixed degrees of realism
over the possibility of receiving formal recognition of the issues
or of obtaining any financial assistance to help with the provision
of services.It became quite clear early on in our visit that the
question of litigation and child abuse were definitely not the
main concerns of the greater majority of former child migrants
we met. This is not to suggest that they do not exist. There are
major court cases in the pipeline and there is an understandable
anxiety at institution and government level which makes them respond
to the issues with caution. It is felt that this area of concern
will drag on for a long time. It is our opinion that the question
of litigation is deflecting interest in the main issues which
affect a significant number of former child migrants.The experience
of former child migrants has been extremely varied. Of the men,
quite a good number have been quite successful in life, particularly
the ones who came out at an early age and went to Castledare.
If they showed promise they would then have moved on the Clontarf
where there was a higher record of academic achievement and there
exists today a large and mainly contented Old Boys' Association.
A number of Clontarf boys would have had the opportunity of attending
Aquinas College with the possibility of university entrance. Older
children would have gone to Tardun or to Bindoon for the "rural"
experience. Again it appears that those who could benefit most
from this kind of experience were moved on to Tardun. This left
Bindoon with the least academically inclined and, we believe,
a higher proportion of those with behavioural difficulties. It
would have been possible for a boy to have experienced from only
one to all four of the institutions. We consider, from the evidence
that we have shared, that the boys at Bindoon would have had the
least opportunities for academic development. On the other hand
there was a wide variety of encouragement in other skills such
as building, related trades and particularly farming.Many former
child migrants, especially former residents of Bindoon complain
about the lack of basic education which has hampered them throughout
their lives and given them a feeling of inadequacy. This has been
compounded by the isolation felt by young people when first exposed
to living on their own after leaving the institution. We would
suggest that the damage done at this stage by having no family
to turn to has been greater than has been generally acknowledged
even today. Many also complain of difficulties in personal relationships.
Others have remained in a dependent position throughout their
lives.As far as the former girl child migrants are concerned,
these centre on two particular groups: the Geraldton girls, and
the St Josephs girls. They see things from quite different perspectives
but, by and large, those who wish to stay in touch with their
past have formed into informal groupings for mutual support and
they appear to have quite a good contact network. They all claim
that life was quite hard in the institutions and the treatment
was sometimes severe, but none has made any formal allegation
of abuse against the staff. They expressed anger that other people
from outside are still trying to run their lives, and they resent
the interference that presumes they cannot manage their own lives.There
were conflicting views regarding publicity from such sources as
"The Leaving of Liverpool". Some men and women
said they could identify, but others said their were grossly exaggerations
or bore no relation at all to their own experience. There were
strong feelings expressed that this sort of publicity was very
damaging to former residents of Catholic institutions as it gave
the public a very slanted impression and stigmatised them. It
represented an emotional destruction of their childhood.We came
to the conclusion that it was convenient for the State and Federal
Government, and to some extent the Church, to keep the Christian
Brothers as the focus of attention—despite their being the
only body to show compassionate concern, to provide services,
and to put up finance for counselling and travel.Apart from the
significant minority, who are totally antagonistic towards the
Brothers and the Church, there is a greater degree of positive
appreciation from both the men and the women of the assistance
provided by the Brothers than we would have anticipated. This
comes even from former child migrants who are disaffected in other
ways because of their life situation which they presume to have
been caused by migration.
THE MAIN
ISSUEWe cannot stress too strongly
that the overwhelming message we received was not about litigation
or abuse, but about service provision especially in respect of
making contracts with family in the UK.There is wide spread frustration,
sometimes anger, about the inability to locate records and about
the length of time taken by researchers. There is also confusion
about how to obtain records, what procedures will result in finding
information what avenues to take to make family contact, where
to find birth certificates, how to trace siblings and other relatives,
etc. There is a deep suspicion that files are being withheld or
that there is some ulterior reason why information is not readily
available. There is no clear understanding about the nature and
content of the files that do exist which, in the main, contain
very little information. There is also a lack of knowledge about
counselling services which could be used, and sometimes a reluctance
to contact or use them.A further important issue is the number
of men who are presumed to be "missing the system" because
they have fared very badly and may be living in hostels and may
have compounded problems such as alcohol abuse, etc.
PRACTICAL WAYS
FORWARDThroughout our visit it
became clear that a positive way of helping would be to assist
with the provision of information leaflets. A general leaflet
for public distribution is the first essential. This would provide
information on practical procedures needed in finding personal
records. It would summarise the procedure on tracing and family
finding; a list of agencies and services in Australia, and the
list of agencies in the UK which may hold records or can provide
family counselling services. A second, more comprehensive leaflet
for use by agencies in Western Australia which might be approached
by former child migrants would contain fuller information, some
background history and clear practice recommendations. A third
leaflet would be a guide to practice issues and procedures as
a resource for Centacare offices nationwide (and for any other
counselling services). We were able to obtain tacit agreement
from the State Government that some assistance could be forthcoming
for the distribution of information leaflets to such places as
libraries, doctors surgeries, clinics, hostels, information and
counselling services, etc.One of the main areas of concern is
about travel back to the UK to visit family and relatives. Whilst
it is possible for some former child migrants to raise their own
funds, and others qualify for support from the Christian Brothers
ex-residents services, there is still the expense of living in
England while contact and introductions are arranged. We feel
that it could be possible to locate host families or accommodation
in religious houses where visiting former child migrants could
live at less expense and at the same time receive companionship
and support from their hosts.Finally, it had been suggested that
we might in some way act as a catalyst in the raising of further
funds. The experience in Australia has been of difficulty in getting
the various parties to act in unison. With the contacts we have
made it would appear that some funds for travel could available
from sources other than the Christian Brothers.Christopher FisherMary
Gandy11 March 1995 The above
is a reduced version of the report written at the time of the
visit.Canon Fisher moved on from Western Australia to the Eastern
States.The following footnotes appear at the end of Part 2 of
the report.
FOOTNOTES1. The visit
to Western Australia was undertaken jointly by Canon Christopher
Fisher and Mrs Mary Gandy. The remainder of the visit to South
Australia, Victoria, Tasmania, Canberra, New South Wales and Queensland,
was undertaken alone by Canon Fisher.2. A vast area, geographically,
historically and socially, has been covered in a relatively short
visit. There was no working model of measurement or framework
on which to base this investigation. It may be found that some
of the statements or conclusions are fairly generalised. There
has been a genuine effort to report faithfully the situation as
recounted from many different angles. It has not been appropriate
to take sides.3. Much of the benefit of this visit will not be
visible in the report, but will have already taken place through
the personal contacts made and by raising the profile and the
needs of former child migrants in the minds of politicians, Church
authorities, religious bodies, agencies and individuals.4. The
visit met with universal enthusiasm. It is hoped this report will
be similarly received.
|
