The Gazette 1967/71

they not be a liability to the State later on but they can become a great asset. Where the home is broken by reason of the death or defection of one or other of the parents, we feel it is of the utmost importance that the contact of the surviving or continuing parents with the children should be preserved. In many cases we are aware that it is difficult for the parent to visit the children in the School, therefore a system should be provided whereby the parent would be enabled at the expense of the State to visit his or her children at the School at regular intervals and not only to visit them but to be enabled when visiting them to take the children out for the evening, in the same way as any natural parent would do if his child were at a Boarding School. It need not be a lavish provision but it should be reasonably adequate. For this reason also we consider it highly desirable that the Schools shou'rl be more widely dispersed and of a smaller kind co that the children can be committed to School as near as possible to their relatives so that the relatives may visit them, not only on the occasions when they are subsidised by the State but on other occasions if they feel the wish to do. In order also that the child's situation may approximate as close as possible to his more for tunate brethern outside he should be provided with some money to spend in the same way as a parent would provide pocket money for his child. This money should be provided and given to the children weekly by the house master or the matron or the assistant matron as the case may be. We think the existing practice whereby a parent is compelled to,make some small contribution (which is quite ineffectual) to the maintenance of his child, in a mistaken view that that will maintain a contact between him and the child, should be discontinued except where the parent is able and willing to make such a contribution. Such cases should be a rarity and indeed the parent should be left to make a proper contribution of his own free will for clothes and holidays and other small luxuries for his child which tend to minh to cement the bond of affection betwen parent and child. We feel also that the visitation of Schools by outside persons not connected at all with the State or the Department but consisting merely of well disposed persons who would associate themselves with a number of the children in the School is very desirable so that the children may have some person in whom they can confide and talk about their difficulties the same as they would to a parent

approximate to the influence of a mother in a natural home. We believe by reason of the low fee provided by the State for the maintenance of children in these Institutions that the qualification of the teachers is not of the same standard as those found in normal Schools. If our recommendation that children should be sent for their education to normal day Schools then the qualifications of the staff in the School will not be of a teaching nature. Nonethe less the staff of the dormitory as it were should be of high quality and, there should be a child psychologist to each one of these schools on a wholetime basis. We consider this of the highest importance because these children have not the advantages of a normal home environment and therefore make greater demands on the expertise of the person to who^e charge they are committed, therefore these persons should be more highly qualified, if anything, than the staff of normal boarding or day Schools. We are conscious, that • the recommendations which are being set out.will mfekc greater demands on the Department of Finance: Fortunately there is ample room for-improvement here because at the present time the fees .parah.by the State to Institutions for. the accommodation of-children of this kind are completely inadequate;.arid'';is the primei factor leading;,to , the' complete breakdown in the system. Indeed were it/not for the self sacrifice and dedication of the people who run these Schools .the whole system would have broken down completely long ago. It is quite improper for society ;to impose upon dedicated people of this kind ;and not only to impose upon them, but to deprive them of the opportunities of doing the work to which they are so dedicated. It seems to us that the State has taken the attitude that they will get rid of this problem at the cheapest possible price regardless of whether or not they are working in a compet itive market or imposing upon the self sacrifice of the people who have engaged themselves in this work. Apart altogether from the injustice of this it is economically stupid, where the State skimp in an unconscionable manner the allocation of funds for the reformation and education of children who are deprived of their home life for one reason or other they are providing for themselves a prob lem which will have to be provided for at a later stage at much greater expense to the community, whereas if money were spent during the formative years of these childrens existence, not only would