HSE criticises dioceses over child safety practices

A HSE audit of child protection guidelines in the Catholic Church has found shortcomings still remain in a number of dioceses.

According to the authors of the report: “Safeguarding is being interpreted inconsistently across dioceses and implemented to varying degrees”. It recommends that in some dioceses, such as Achonry, a “whistleblowing” policy should be introduced.

In total, 579 allegations in relation to 189 priests were notified to the 24 dioceses and the audit returns indicate that 31 priests have been convicted of child sexual abuse.

Of the 411 allegations that should have been reported to the civil authorities, only 60 were reported “with immediacy”.

The audit states that all allegations should ideally be reported to the gardaí and the HSE within one to three days.

The audit found that historically some allegations were not reported for years, or in some cases reported to one authority but not the other, under the assumption that both the HSE and gardaí were in contact.

In other cases, delays in contacting the HSE were attributed to problems in making contact with personnel within the body.

The audits went back as far as 1996 and found that practices had improved in most areas, but that problems remain.

However, the HSE said some dioceses deserved particular mention for performing well across its standards including Armagh, Waterford and Lismore, Elphin, Dublin, and Clonfert (despite the criticisms over its reporting).

Elsewhere, significant improvements were found in both Kilmore and Killala, while the dioceses of Limerick and Kerry were making steady progress and were encouraged to continue with their efforts.

The diocese of Kildare and Leighlin was found to have demonstrated examples of good practice over a consistent period.

Up to 13 years to report allegation to authorities

Among those criticised were:

CLONFERT

* The diocese took between seven and 13 years to report seven allegations.

* Of the allegations, made between 1997 and 2002, none were reported to the HSE or gardaí until 2010.

* Its failure to report allegations promptly meant information given to the HSE in 2009 did not accurately reflect the number known to the diocese at the time.

CORK AND ROSS

* Incomplete dates were provided in over a quarter of cases.

* Only four of 19 allegations after 1996 were reported within one to three days.

* While all allegations were reported within the recommended framework, the HSE noted a lack of immediacy.

MEATH

* The diocese was unaware of 12 allegations known to gardaí relating to incidents alleged to have occurred there involving a local priest. This was deemed concerning.

* The bishop failed to record any dates on which allegations were made, despite guidelines to do so. He told the HSE: “I don’t have exact dates because I never received them.”

* Information given to the HSE was based solely on the bishop’s knowledge. Any details that were not memoed to him were not included.

* When dates of allegations were eventually provided, it was unclear why there had been such a delay.

OSSORY

* The diocese wrongly believed the Meath diocese was handling allegations against a priest relating to offences in Ossory.

* The priest in question is known to gardaí in connection with four allegations but the diocese only provided information for two.

* A lack of information regarding two priests convicted of sexual abuse was deemed concerning.

* Significant gaps in information given to the audit, making it difficult to assess how allegations were handled.

RAPHOE

* The diocese failed to provide the date that it was first notified of 19 allegations against one priest, claiming it had not been informed directly.

* Data quality was poor, often with incomplete dates provided.

* Failed to report 82% of allegations within recommended timeframe, 79% of which took over a year to report.

* Overall quality of information and speed of reporting was deemed poor.

ACHONRY

* The diocese failed to include allegations that fell within the scope of the audit, including claims against seven deceased priests and one widely publicised allegation.

* One priest in question is still ministering elsewhere in the world and it is not clear if he was ever formally risk-assessed, but Church authorities in that country have been notified of the allegation.