Can Anyone Explain This?

In a letter (circa 1940s) to the Religious Order managing [an Institution] the Education Minister states that [he] is ….

quote:gravely concerned at the evidence which has been reaching him for a considerable time of the malnutrition of children in [the Institutions], particularly those for girls and junior boys.

The letter meanders a bit but then goes on to propose to have a course in institutional management and goes on to describe the course:

quote:It would deal with the fundamentals of institutional cookery as applied to industrial school needs. Practical training in essential {processes} and dishes would be given and particular attention would be paid to methods of serving large quantities of food. There would also be lectures on the economic planning of menus in accordance with dietetic needs, on costing, storage, and preparation of foodstuffs. In addition, the Department’s Medical Inspector would avail of the opportunity to give some lectures on balance in diet, hygiene, etc,.

The 3 main points of contention were;

(1) Inability to provide adequate quantities of food;
(2) Failure to do so owing to parsimony; and
(3) Failure to provide a properly balanced diet (even when the quantity is adequate) owing to lack of training in the management of institutions for children and ignorance of fundamental dietetic principles.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

This letter was sent to a Religious Order that owned and managed:
1. Hospitals
2. National Schools
3. Secondary Schools
4. Boarding Schools

In addition to owning & managing the above they also owned & managed:
1. Magdalene Laundries
2. Mother & Baby Homes
3. Industrial Schools

Yet it was only with the pregnant women, pregnant children, babies, infants & children in the second list that this particular Religious Order had a ‘problem‘ that required an Institutional Management Course.

Can anyone explain this?  

Read Full Post »