Peter Ellis web site - Christchurch crèche case


ACC Compensation for Sex Abuse - Index

 

2003 Index 

 




The Dominion Post
October 30, 2003

Justifying expenditure
Letter to the Editor
by Gordon Waugh, Auckland

Your article headed ACC may not chase false sex payouts (Oct 22) illustrates well the naive and irresponsible attitude of ACC to sexual abuse claims.

Responding to a parliamentary question, ACC Minister Ruth Dyson said that ACC always requires credible evidence to support acceptance of cover for the mental consequences of sexual abuse.

More than 94,000 such claims have been made in recent years. The majority are based on a claimant's uncorroborated story and the beliefs and assumptions of the counsellor. Evidence of abuse is not required. Alleged perpetrators need not be identified. Claims are rarely investigated.

ACC says it "would definitely pursue people who had lied about being sexually abused to get ACC payouts. But those thinking they had been abused, who later realised they had not, would not necessarily have to refund the money".

If ACC can't distinguish between true and false claims, how would it know if a complainant lied? Is it sufficient for claimants to merely "think they were abused"?

Taxpayers are entitled to know that ACC expenditure is properly justified. That requires credible, testable evidence of abuse and consequential mental injury, and conviction of the perpetrator.