Jehovah’s Witnesses say they will join the National Redress Scheme due to the new “rules”
It was the threat of financial penalties that triggered the Jehovah’s Witnesses to join the National Redress Scheme – a sour taste for survivors of sexual abuse and lawyers alike.
Senator Anne Ruston set a new deadline of December 31st 2020. If they missed the deadline this time, the institutions would not be eligible for future Commonwealth grants, their charitable status would be revoked and they would be stripped of their tax exemptions.
“Now that the law requires charities to join the scheme, Jehovah’s Witnesses will comply. Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that it is their responsibility before God to respect and co-operate with the authorities.”
“We encourage them to make urgent contact with the Department of Social Services so they can make good on this commitment,” she said.
“It can take up to six months for institutions to complete the process of joining and the department would hope to work cooperatively and with haste to facilitate the Jehovah’s Witnesses joining as quickly as possible.
“It is disappointing survivors who have named the Jehovah’s Witnesses have been forced to have their application for redress on hold this long while the organisation has been unwilling to join.”
Paralympics Australia has also joined the National Redress Scheme
Paralympics Australia has decided to join the National Redress Scheme and support survivors of institutional abuse.
This comes as more and more sporting institutions join the scheme including Basketball Australia and Gymnastics Australia.
“We support the National Redress Scheme and are strongly committed to providing environments that are safe, supportive and fun for children and young people,” Paralympics Australia President Jock O’Callaghan said.
“We have zero tolerance for any form of behaviour that puts the well-being of children and young people at risk.”
The wheels were already in motion for positive change within Paralympics Australia.
In September 2020, Paralympics Australia, the Commonwealth Games and the Australian Olympic Committee – representing 53 sports combined – rolled out a new process so athletes have access to an independent assessment of complaints and allegations.
All Government funded sports are also required to have a Member Protection Policy (MPP) and Child Safeguarding Policy outlining the standard of behaviour required of athletes, coaches, officials and other support personnel.
Australian Olympic Committee Chief Executive Officer, Matt Carroll, says it is in the best interests of all sports to have an independent avenue for complaints about abuse, intimidation and other safeguarding issues.
“There’s no place for abuse in our sports, but the missing link has been the lack of access to an independent framework. We have started a process to develop a model that will remedy that. There’s a lot of detail to discuss,” Matt said.
“Any form of abuse is abhorrent – we acknowledge the catastrophic impact abuse has on the lives of those abused, and their families and friends.”
“Our organisation is strongly aligned to the values and expectations of the National Redress Scheme and we remain ready to work closely with the scheme to support any survivors that may come forward.”
Kenja Communications raises the Porter Defense to avoid joining the Scheme
Now that the Jehovah’s Witnesses will join the National Redress Scheme, there is only one institution left that is refusing to join: Kenja Communications.
The spiritual self-help group has invoked Attorney-General Christian Porter’s position on the historical rape allegation against him (which he denies) to support its position.
The group’s late founder, Ken Dyer, faced multiple sexual assault allegations. He was found guilty of one of the alleged assaults, but the conviction was overturned in the High Court.
When Dyer was accused of raping a woman 33 years ago, he claimed:
“There are circumstances where someone might absolutely believe something, but it might not be a reliable account. That is actually why we have a justice system. It is why we have courts and the presumption of innocence and burdens of proof.”
Now, Dyer’s widow Jan Hamilton runs the group. On their website, the group said that the same principles cited by the Attorney-General apply to the group’s decision not to join the National Redress Scheme.
“Anyone can contact the scheme and say they were abused as a child and without due process, in fact it appears without any real process, can receive up to $150,000 in compensation.”
“We are of the view that recent events including the Christian Porter case confirm the legitimacy and appropriateness of the position we have taken regarding not joining the National Redress Scheme.”
“In our respectful opinion, if it is proper for the Attorney-General to invoke the rule of law, it is also proper for us.”
Hamilton has also said in the past she believes the abuse did not take place – meaning survivors will be locked out of compensation through the National Redress Scheme.
“Whilst we agree with the objectives of compensating child sex abuse victims, it is not appropriate in our view where genuine claims do not exist.”
A former member named Annette Stevens wrote about her experience in a 2012 article published via news.com.au.
“Sometimes we’d be processed naked in one-on-one sessions – Ken said it helped energy flow freely through the body. Once, when I woke from the fog of a naked processing session, Ken was lying on top of me with his trousers and underpants around his ankles.”
“But my Kenjan mind-training kicked in and I immediately dismissed the idea he’d acted inappropriately, reasoning I could trust Ken and, if he’d touched me, I’d remember it.”
The Catholic Church paid $276 million to victims of alleged sex abuse committed by priests in Australia over decades, an investigation says.
Critics say the system of payments is unfair and not all victims receive the same opportunities or compensation.
Since 2013, the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse has been holding hearings on alleged Catholic Church sex abuse of children – mostly boys.
“Catholic Church authorities made total payments of [AU]$276.1 million [US$213million] in response to claims of child sexual abuse received between 1 January 1980 and 28 February 2015, including monetary compensation, treatment, legal and other costs,” the statement from the commission said on Thursday.
On average, sex abuse victims received AU$91,000 in compensation, it stated.
The Christian Brothers religious community “reported both the highest total payment and the largest number of total payments $48.5 million paid in relation to 763 payments at an average of approximately $64,000 per payment,” the document said.null
The report added that the Jesuits “had the highest average total payment at an average of approximately $257,000 per payment (of those Catholic Church authorities who made at least 10 payments).”
Read analysis of Catholic Church Authorities’ data on claims of child abuse https://t.co/4AYWsYEytb
“Even though the church has paid $270 million and it took a long time to get its act together to do that, there’s no doubt the system of paying people and compensating them is best done independently of the church through a national redress scheme,”the Church’s Truth Justice and Healing Council chief executive, Francis Sullivan, told AAP.
Sullivan said that not all victims have equal opportunities or compensation.
“Some congregations pay far more than others. Some dioceses pay far more than others. It’s still not a fair system,” he added.
It’s a picture of great unfairness and inequity between survivors across Australia depending on where they placed their claim,” Helen Last, CEO of In Good Faith Foundation, which represents 460 abuse victims, told Reuters.
The commission was established in 2013 to investigate instances and allegations of child sexual abuse in Australia. This month’s report says that between January 1980 and February 2015, 93 Catholic Church authorities received claims of child sexual abuse from 4,445 people.
It managed to identify 1,880 alleged perpetrators, who included 597 (32 percent) ‘religious brothers,’572 (30 percent) priests, 543 (29 percent) lay people, and 96 (5 percent) ‘religious sisters.’ At least 90 percent of the alleged perpetrators were male, according to the report.
Sexual abuse scandals have long dogged the Catholic Church. In 2014, the Vatican said 3,420 credible accusations of sexual abuse committed by priests had been referred to it over the past 10 years, and that 824 clerics were defrocked as a result.
In January, Pope Francis called for “zero tolerance”towards sex crimes against children, and condemned it as “a sin that shames” both the perpetrators and those who cover up for their crimes.
⚫️ Neuroscientific and other research confirm that memory is not a single entity and that different kinds of memory are stored in different parts of the brain. ⚫️In broad terms there are two types of memory. Explicit memory is conscious and can be expressed verbally, while implicit memory is largely unconscious and non-verbal. ⚫️Explicit memory requires focused attention to consolidate while implicit memory is encoded outside of awareness. ⚫️Both explicit and implicit memory also include subcategories. For explicit memory, these include declarative (also called `semantic’) and episodic (also called `autobiographical’ or `narrative’) memory. ⚫️Declarative memory (i.e. explicit memory type 1) is the only subcategory of memory that can be deliberately called up, i.e. consciously remembered. It conveys pieces of information to others and has been described as `cold’ for this reason (Levine, ibid: 15-16). ⚫️By contrast, episodic (i.e. explicit memory type 2, also called `autobiographical’ and `narrative’) memory can be described as `warm’ and textured (Levine, 2015: 16). Episodic memory `emerges somewhat spontaneously’, and can be `infused with feeling tones and vitality’ (Levine, ibid: 16-17). E.g. `I remember when I first saw the lake…’ It is less conscious than the `shopping list’ type of declarative memories but `more conscious…than implicit memories’. It forms `a dynamic interface between the `rational’ (explicit/declarative) and `irrational’ (implicit/emotional) realms’ (Levine, ibid: 16-17). ⚫️The subcategories of implicit memory can be described as `emotional’ and `procedural’. Emotional memory ( i.e. implicit memory type 1) puts us in touch with what we are feeling, helps us signal our feelings and needs to others, and is `experienced in the body as physical sensations’ (Levine, 2015: 22; emphasis added). It may also be elicited by an environmental cue such as a smell, sight or sound.
⚫️Procedural memories (i.e. implicit memory type 2.)`are the impulses, movements, and internal body sensations that guide us through the how to of our various actions, skills, attractions, and repulsions’ (Levine, 2015: 25). They help us carry out tasks automatically. Procedural memories may be further subdivided into three groupings of learned motor actions, hardwired emergency responses, and response tendencies of approach or avoidance and attraction or repulsion. ⚫️Everyday use of the word `memory’ (but also in psychology textbooks; Brand & McEwen, 2014) generally refers only to conscious, explicit memory which ignores the ongoing importance and various forms of implicit memories (Levine, 2015).
MEMORY, BRAIN DEVELOPMENT, AND PROCESSES
⚫️Implicit memory develops before explicit memory, as conscious recall depends on development of the hippocampus in the second year of life. ⚫️Conscious (explicit) memory, conscious thought and verbalisation are privileged both by health professions and by society in general (Levine, 2015). ⚫️Implicit, pre-verbal memories do not `disappear’ when the hippocampus develops but are stored in different neural networks and can manifest across the life cycle. ⚫️Memory is not `a discrete phenomenon, a fixed construction, cemented permanently onto a stone foundation’ (Levine, 2015: 2). Rather it is complex and involves different types and subcategories which function in different ways. ⚫️Memory is impacted by the processes of encoding, consolidation, and retrieval. Encoding (or formation) describes the original neural laying down of memory. Consolidation (or retention) describes the stabilisation and storage of memory (a process involving the hippocampus) after encoding. Retrieval (or recall) describes the remembering, revival or restoration to consciousness of memory first encoded and then consolidated.
⚫️`When memories are retrieved, they are susceptible to change, such that future retrievals call upon the changed information’ (Rydberg, 2017:94). Research substantiates that `[m]emory is a reconstructive process’, and that `no memory is a literal account, nor an exact replica, of an experience or event’ (Goodman-Delahunty et al., 2017: 46).
TRAUMATIC MEMORY
`REMEMBERING BY RELIVING’: TRAUMA, REPETITION & BEHAVIOURAL REENACTMENT
⚫️Current neuroscientific research confirms that trauma is often remembered through behavioural enactment (van der Kolk, ibid). Traumatised people are frequently unable to speak about their experiences and are `compelled to re-enact them, often remaining unaware of what their behaviour is saying’ (Howell, 2005: 56-57).
⚫️Remembering `in the form of physical sensations, automatic responses, and involuntary movements’ (Ogden et al, 2006: 165) is characteristic of trauma: `Traumatic memories may also take the form of unconscious `acting-out’ behaviours’ (Levine, 2015: 8).
⚫️The need to resolve traumatic experience can fuel repetitive and compulsive actions and behaviours (`Unresolved experiences tend to haunt us until they can be finished’; van der Hart et al, 2006: 246). ⚫️The relationship between repetitive, problematic behaviour and unresolved trauma needs to be recognised so that trauma survivors can be better supported towards recovery.
REMEMBERING & `FORGETTING’
⚫️While our brains are wired to remember experiences important to survival, under some circumstances survival may be assisted by `forgetting’ (Levine, 2015; Freyd & Birrell, 2013; Silberg, 2013). ⚫️As children depend on adult caregivers, `forgetting’ traumatic experiences can have survival value in preserving the attachment bond: `[F]orgetting abuse is a way to preserve the attachment relationship when the abuser is someone the victim is dependent on’ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013: 58); `Disruptions in memory may be adaptive… if trauma and caregiving emanate from the same source’ (Silberg, 2013: 12).
⚫️The impacts of stress on the brain, the different neural networks in which memory is stored, the differences between conscious, explicit and unconscious, implicit memory, and the capacity of the mind to compartmentalise and/or detach from experience (`dissociate’) help explain the phenomenon of `recovered’ memory (i.e. delayed onset memory recall).
RECOVERED MEMORY (DELAYED ONSET MEMORY RECALL)
⚫️The term `recovered memory’ describes sudden intrusion of memories which were previously unavailable: `[r]ecovered memories are those memories that have been forgotten for a period and then remembered’ (Barlow et al, 2017: 322).
⚫️Research confirms that trauma can disrupt memory in numerous ways and at any one or more of its various stages (‘If recovered memory experiences appear counter-intuitive, this is in part due to misconceptions about trauma and memory’;Brewin, 2012:149). ⚫️Delayed recall of traumatic, implicit memory usually occurs spontaneously, without warning, triggered by a prompt or cue. In trauma, these recovered memory/ies were previously dissociated (i.e. unassimilated and unintegrated) because they were too overwhelming to process. ⚫️The phenomenon of traumatic amnesia and subsequent delayed conscious recall of traumatic events is well documented in diverse populations (e.g. war veterans, Holocaust survivors, and survivors of natural disasters) as well as adult survivors of childhood trauma (van der Hart et al, 1999; Elliott, 1999). ⚫️Largely because of the founding of the so-called False Memory Syndrome Foundation in 1990 -on the premise that people were wrongly accused of sexual abuse on the basis of recovered memories -the term `false memory’ has come to apply solely to the context of recovered memories of child sexual abuse rather than other contexts as well. ⚫️Research establishes that recovered memories are no less likely to be reliable than explicit consciously recalled memories which were never forgotten (Barlow et al, 2017,ref. Chu et al, 1999; Williams, 1995; Dalenberg, 2006). ⚫️In the current period there Is a contrast between the `fantasy’ or `sociocognitive model’ (which proposes that recovered memories result from cultural/environmental influence and/or therapist suggestion) and `the trauma model’ (which notes the intrusion of memories unable to be assimilated because the experiences were too overwhelming (Vissia, Giesen., et al. 2016). The `trauma model’ contends that traumatic implicit memory/ies were dissociated or `split off’ from conscious memory and are recovered when they intrude. ⚫️Memories recovered in therapy represent a small proportion of the total recovered memory reports (Eliott, 1997; Wilsnack, Wonderlich, Kristjanson, Vogeltanz-Holm, & Wilsnack, 2002 cited in Dalenberg et al, 2012) Recovered memories tend to occur without warning and can certainly occur outside of psychotherapy or in its absence.
⚫️Strong, recurrent, and/or disabling, traumatic memories, including delayed onset recall (recovered) memories, may lead the person to become conscious of what they signify. While this experience can be destabilising at first, it can subsequently enable integration of the previously split off (dissociated) memory and pave the way for trauma recovery.
`BETRAYAL BLINDNESS’
⚫️’Betrayal blindness’, or ‘unawareness and forgetting’ has survival value. It stems from the concept of `betrayal trauma’, which assists understanding of how the `forgetting’ of early life abuse serves to preserve the attachment bond to caregivers on which children depend (Freyd, 1991) It also has wide application to a range of contexts: `Although there are various ways to remain blind to betrayal, perhaps the most effective way is to forget the event entirely’ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013: 58). ⚫️The `survival strategy’ of betrayal blindness applies to relationships in which dependence of some kind fosters the need to preserve the relationship and can `trump the need to take protective action’ (Freyd & Birrell, 2103, p.56) ⚫️’Not seeing’, `not knowing’ and `not remembering’ traumatic experience is not confined to children (`Adults are also prone to a kind of magical thinking …to gain a sense of control over overwhelming events’ (Chu, 2011: 34).
⚫️While `forgetting’ the trauma of betrayal (i.e. conscious explicit absence of recall as distinct from implicit memory of traumatic experience) potentially assists survival it can also threaten health if the trauma is not resolved.
THE DYNAMICS OF DISCLOSURE
⚫️The process of disclosing traumatic memory (i.e. when able to be spoken about, which involves a different area of the brain and depends on a number of contingencies) `is highly dependent on the reactions of others’ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013: 126). ⚫️`{M]ost people who experience childhood sexual abuse do not disclose it until adulthood, and many may never tell at all’ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013, p.123). ⚫️Disclosure is often not a single event, but rather a process affected by social context, issues of safety and the potential for adverse repercussions.
⚫️’Nondisclosure, delayed disclosure, and retraction are particularly likely in cases in which the perpetrator is close to the victim’ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013, p.123).
THE RELIABILITY OF MEMORY AND THE ROLE OF SOCIAL CONTEXT
⚫️Depending on the context and conditions, both remembering and `forgetting’ (i.e. in the explicit, conscious sense because `the body remembers’ [Rothschild, 2000] at an implicit level) can be healing and/or destructive ⚫️Social contexts and power disparities, as well as neurological factors, affect the encoding, retrieval, and reliability of memory: `[s]ocial power not only dictates what is appropriate to say out loud, but even what it is appropriate to remember’ (Barlow et al, 2017: 320). ⚫️’Both internal and external processes operate to keep us unaware’ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013: 95); `To the extent that it is not safe to disclose externally, it is not safe to know, or disclose internally, to oneself’ (ibid: 116).
⚫️’Contrary to the widespread myth that traumatic events are seldom if ever forgotten, much trauma is not remembered until something happens to bring it to mind’ (Brewin, 2012: 165). ⚫️Current research establishes that memory is not fixed and unchanging and that all memory -implicit and explicit -undergoes a degree of reconstruction. This does not mean that either is necessarily unreliable. ⚫️Research has shown that recovered (implicit) memory can be as accurate as continuous i.e. (explicit, conscious) memory (Dalenberg et al. 2012): `Memories that are recovered – those that were forgotten and subsequently recalled-can often be corroborated and are no more likely to be confabulated than are continuous memories’ (Chu, 2011, p.80 citing Dalenberg, 1996; Kluft, 1995; Lewis, Yeager, Swiza, Pincus & Lewis, 1997); also Dalenberg et al, 2012). ⚫️Numerous legal cases in various parts of the world have demonstrated that recovered memories have been verified and corroborated by independent evidence, admissions of guilt by perpetrators, or findings of guilt by courts. https://blogs.brown.edu/recoveredmemory/case-archive/legal-cases/
⚫️’The cognitive processes that underlie everyday memory are the same processes that lead to errors in processing traumatic memories…Like any memory , the availability of memory for traumatic events depends on how it is assessed’ (Barlow, 2017: 323, referencing Sivers, 2002). ⚫️Assessment of the reliability of memory must take account of a range of factors. These include the social context of memory, the possibility of betrayal trauma, the survival value of (explicit, conscious) `forgetting’, the impact of power disparities, and the centrality of emotional and physical safety around recall and disclosure.
To read the full paper The Memory of Truth and the Truth of Memory – Different Types of Memory and the Significance of Trauma; click here
To read our four summary Fact Sheets on Memory – Classification, Understanding Memory, Understanding Traumatic Memory, Recovered memory, click here
Unsurprisingly (or suprisingly), depending from which POV it is viewed. These leaps in reviews may often indicate that there is greater interest in the topics covered. This melds well, with compared with 2020’s yearly stats (as follow). Notable leaps in ‘Statements’ (comments from other ‘Old Boys’/past BBC students) have a majority of comments, from either past students-family-relations. Through these, a consistent pattern of implicit learning to inherently have the occurrence of ongoing CSA remaining ‘hidden’ in targeted victims often remaining silent. As those who dared raise any objection were indirectly un-enrolled/removed-from-the-system, the multi-layered, hegemonic CSA structure continued. Ironically (?) it was our first female PM Julia Gillard (as pictured), who was able to call the essential Royal Commission (CARC 2013-17), from which we’re now in a ten year NRS.
Taking an ongoing interest in AK Buchanan, out of the moment, 2020’s current stats already show that there is a core interest in:
Taking an ongoing interest in AK Buchanan, out of the moment, 2020’s current stats already show that there is a core interest in:
Having completed my initial NRS Experiences and Impact Statements (NRS Fact Sheet, 2019), it initially felt ironic that the most nerves I had felt was actually at the final stage: Apologies. Advice that has given earlier indicates that description of each individual instance, together with personal impacts from each of their ongoing effects supports the evidence throughout the Instances and Impact Statements. While I had previously had the wrong POV, that completing Instances and Impact Statements, my work would be over – taking a wider POV, it’s now clearer that each section confirms and complements related matters throughout the NRS Submission.
NRS icon
As exciting as all this may sound, the journey of its lodgement isn’t over. knowmore (Community Legal Service) is another body involved in the National Redress Scheme. There are also Senior Staff within Blue Knot, who are able to offer their advice into the fine-tuning/tweaking of the order, expressions, focus and editing of Preliminary NRS Submissions.
In working my way through some of the updated NRS data, I came across the following list of possible example list of impacts of CSA experiences (Describing Impact of your Application, 2019). In closer focus, it began to both horrify my and reminded me in the instance(s) that I’m drafting up a list of requested apologies. I also realise that I am ‘but one fish in the sea’ of previous CSA Assaults. Although I feel fortunate for the beneficial discussions I’ve had, my deepest request/suggestion goes out to any other Surviving-Victim of CSA: Seeking Help can be done anonymously! When you’re ready to take things further, Expert Guidance is available.
Some Private Schools in NSW are supported outright by Religious bodies, also sharing traits with many of Brisbane’s CSA experiences (GPS). Coupled with the ‘Teacher-swapping’ habitus of GM Cujes and his involvement in the CARC, there’s been withdrawal of School Seniority from Catholic Schools and Change-of-Names. The ‘Christian Brothers’ (seriously, not satire) had withdrawn their church leadership (ABCNews 2019), appointing laymen to these Headmaster roles. As there had already been suspicious reputations of secrecy and cloister (ABCnews 2019 & BRA 2020). Thankfully the separations into ‘good’ Patients and ‘bad’ Patients extended to occasional medical checks at local hospitals. In keeping with canon law to remain completely anonymous to outside authorities (King 2019). Ironically the Patients who made the majority of the ‘bad’ group, were Catholic Christian Brothers. Seemingly, like persona forced themselves to flock together leading to give a negative impression on nurses who were used to serving a wider public audience.
Brother Lawrence Murphy (right) abused John Lawrence (sitting) while he was at the Castledare Boys’ Home.(Supplied: District Court Of WA). Image retrieved from Google search : Catholic _ icon/image.
Unsurprisingly, George Pell had perjured himself in his Defense of Gerald Ridsdale. As immortalised by the following photo, Pell would later be acquitted by an overruling Australian High Court (2020). Potentially on legal-technicalities, the multiple Judges overruled a previous Guilty Verdict of Pell. Now in the Catholic’s Vatican, Pell may be enjoying his escape from judicial trials yet as any CSA Victim-Survivour knows, their actions will leave their mark until the end.
George Pell (right) with now-disgraced priest Gerald Ridsdale in 1993
Ironically, GM Cujes (although denouncing CARC allegations, 2016) achieved Headmaster of Trinity College. Previously St Patrick’s College, later renamed Trinity Catholic College by the Catholic Church. Changing names (persons, businesses & institutions) is frequently associated with desires to create distance from historic events of the previous namesake. Psychology, Justice and other fields acknowledge these facts. Unsurprisingly, GM Cujes had preferred to be referred to by his middle name whilst Headmaster of BBC (1990-1996). Under Trinity appointment, Graham appears missing as their preference. AK Buchanan (‘Butch’) used similar choices between his hunting-playgrounds (BBC & IGS): (A) Kim at BBC and Anthony K at Ipswich Grammar School.
21 October 2020 This newsletter gives an update on the National Redress Scheme (the Scheme). It covers the launch of new Scheme resources, a second anniversary review update and recent data.
The update contains material that could be confronting or distressing. Sometimes words or images can cause sadness or distress or trigger traumatic memories, particularly for people who have experienced past abuse or childhood trauma.
The Australian Government is committed to continually improving the Scheme for survivors.
Announced in the 2020-21 Budget, a further $104.6 million will be invested in the Scheme to improve and stabilise the operation of the Scheme and better support survivors to ensure the Scheme meets their expectations.
Redress Support Services play a critical role in providing timely, trauma-informed and culturally appropriate support to survivors. This includes providing emotional support for survivors, as well as practical support to complete an application and interact with the Scheme.
The department is aware that several Redress Support Services are experiencing increased demand. This funding will minimise the number of people applying without support and ensure that appropriate assistance is available to survivors.
Institutions
The Scheme is continuously working with institutions that have been named in applications or identified by other means to encourage them to join and participate in the Scheme. To date the Commonwealth, all state and territory governments and 288 non-government institutions covering around 53,300 sites such as churches, schools, homes, charities and community groups across Australia are participating.
A further 117 institutions have committed to join and finalise on-boarding by no later than 31 December 2020.
The National Redress Scheme review is seeking responses from survivors and support services, carers and advocates to a feedback study on experiences with the Scheme and especially with the application process.
The findings from this study will inform the findings of the review and are therefore very significant. The study is being conducted by the University of New South Wales and is confidential. The review needs your input to inform its findings and recommendations to improve the operation of the Scheme. There is one for survivors and the second is for survivor supports including advocates, carers, family members and support services. Please have your say. The study is open until 23 October 2020 and links to the study are as follows:
It should be made clear, that from the range of ‘Statements’ collected, that most “Institutions” overseen by the 2013-17 CARC continue the traditions of:
Hegemony,
Class-dynamics (IE low-0SES),
Layered-secrecy (‘secret societies’)
Numerous others exist, yet these have been highlighted in the Admin of this RCbbc Blog. Through the inclusion of the UK’s Visible Program, further explanations are able to be shared. Hopes continue that similar Australian/NZ bodies may join RCbbc’s goals. The current NRS is Australia’s victim-survivours to seek Redress 2018-28. ABC have already released provocative Series on 4Corners (St. Kevin’s) + Revelation (Catholic Church).