Allegations of Sexual Abuse in NZ


False Allegations - Index

 

Opinion and Comment - 2004

 



www.peterellis.co.nz
June 12 2004

Best Practice Guidelines for Dealing with Sexual Abuse Concerns
by Richard Christie



The June 2004 "St Albans Neighbourhood News" included a letter from Nancy Sutherland and Richard Christie about the launch of a manual that outlines procedures for use in the event that sexual abuse allegations are made. Sutherland and Christie outlined concerns about the content of the manual ("Best Practice Guidelines for Dealing with Sexual Abuse Concerns" written by START, CYF and NZ Police).

In the same edition, Donna Ellen replied to the Sutherland/Christie letter. The following is a critique of Donna Ellen's response.

 

Letter by Donna Ellen

Critique by Richard Christie


I wish to respond to the letter by Richard Christie and Nancy Sutherland regarding the publication of the "Best Practice Guidelines for Dealing with Sexual Abuse Concerns".

In opening, a clarification is required. St Albans Primary School was not the venue for the launch of "The Best Practice Guidelines for Dealing with Sexual Abuse Concerns" it was English Park.

 

This manual is a community response

Critique Richard Christie:

This sounds impressive but warrants examination. In absence of further information this statement has the potential to be misleading. From which groups within the community were consultations made? and from whom were submissions sought? START is the only local NZ community based group mentioned within the document (Excluding Police/CYF). The term "Community Organisations" is used on the title page but no specifics are ever given. This is grossly inadequate

 

Letter by Donna Ellen:

to child abuse and was designed for use within the Health, Social Service and Education sectors for those who routinely work with young people. More specifically, its use is indicated where there are sexual abuse concerns.

 

It provides a sound and widely endorsed (CYFS and NZ Police) process for having a sexual abuse concern formally investigated.

 

Critique Richard Christie:

Christie and Sutherland clearly state in their letter that it is not the CYF and Police material that they take major issue with

Letter by Donna Ellen:

The authors of this correspondence appear to have misinterpreted the purpose of the manual.

 

Firstly, they seem to assume its use in all situations involving young people, when it is designed to be used specifically where there is a sexual abuse concern

Critique Richard Christie:

This claim is baseless. There is nothing in Christie and Sutherland's letter to support such fancy; rather, the opening paragraph in the Christie/Sutherland letter clearly indicates the manual is designed to be used "in the event" that sexual abuse allegations are made

 

Letter by Donna Ellen:

Secondly, Ms Sutherland and Mr Christie describe the contents as having "no caution about the need to reserve judgement as to the veracity of any allegations made by children".

 

Again, the purpose of the document is not to provide a process for an investigation into any allegations, rather, the steps to be taken to enable an investigation. 

It is imperative that untrained people do not investigate sexual abuse allegations and the process outlined in the manual gives the cleanest possibility of achieving an unbiased and high quality investigation

Critique Richard Christie:

These claims merit closer examination

Firstly, that "the purpose of the document is not to provide a process for an investigation into any allegations":

Section Two of the manual: 'Signs Signals - Victims of Sexual Abuse' appears to do exactly that. Here are some of its sub-headings and associated content:

Step One: Consider the Possibility

"Always consider the possibility of abuse and neglect when a child or young person is injured, appears distressed or depressed without obvious reason, has persistent or new behavioural problems or displays unusual or fearful responses to caregivers.  A high index of suspicion is essential"


[emphasis added]



Step Two: Look for signs of Abuse


[behavioural signs are specifically alluded to, but examples are not specified].



Step Three: Document all information

 ..."Obtain as much detail and specific information as possible"

 
[No information is given as how to go about this without contaminating the child's evidence i.e. not to use leading questions, not to use repeated questions, not to share information, not to demonise the accused and much more].

Steps two and three are investigative procedures. This means the Manual is outlining an investigative process (albeit only initial stages) and furthermore is effectively creating conditions for unsound testimony.

Secondly it contradicts Ellen's assertion "it is imperative that untrained people do not investigate sexual abuse allegations" by encouraging these practises in its readers who are largely untrained in these specialist areas (i.e. workers in health, social service and education sectors.

 

Letter by Donna Ellen:

We believe New Zealand cannot afford to ignore concerns of child sexual abuse. We need a clear and legally sound process that is widely publicized for such concerns to be investigated. We need investigation specialists to undertake this task and for non-specialists to understand how to access such investigations.

 

Saliel and Olympia Aplin are deathly examples of an inappropriate response to a sexual abuse concern.

Critique Richard Christie:

It saddens the writer that the Aplin sisters are again publicly paraded (it is suspected) as ammunition for an emotive response of support for child protection workers. No one endorses the failures of the system toward those children. Protection of children against sexual interference encompasses a wide range of issues and I strongly suspect the specific issues discussed in these letters have very little indeed to do with the Aplin case.

 

Letter by Donna Ellen:

The working party that developed the manual stands by its effort to increase community understanding of this difficult and complex issue. Such complexity is an inadequate excuse for doing nothing






Critique Richard Christie:

Another red herring as Christie/Sutherland have certainly not mooted the path of doing nothing about the issue. Use of this tactic in argument serves to trivialise and avoid rational discussion

 

Letter by Donna Ellen:

Your correspondents dismiss the concept of listening to children




Critique Richard Christie:

Another baseless and insulting inference

 

Letter by Donna Ellen:

This working party would say we must listen to children when they talk of distress or abuse in their life and that we must ensure that suitably trained specialists properly investigate such children's concerns







Critique Richard Christie:

In summary Ellen has completely failed to address the concerns raised by Christie and Sutherland. There is no reference to the promotion of material such as The Courage to Heal; no acknowledgement that use of clusters of behaviours to identify sexual abuse victims is problematic; there is no response to the concerns over care being required before believing all children say.

Unfortunately, intransigence in identifying and dealing with ill founded dogma ultimately serves to undermine public confidence in the agencies entrusted with the protection of our children. The Donna Ellen response to our concerns typifies such intransigence.

In the end it is the children who suffer