|
|
Allegations
of Abuse in Institutions |
|
|
|
|
Lynley Hood finds deep
flaws in the Lake Alice settlement. News that the police
have found no evidence of criminal offending by psychiatrist Dr Selwyn Leeks,
former head of the child and adolescent unit at Lake Alice Hospital, has been
greeted with dismay by the psychiatric patient advocacy group, Citizen's Commission
on Human Rights (CCHR). "We're not giving up now. We are still working
with victims and are still going to be filing criminal complaints," the
group's New Zealand executive director, Steve Green, told the Herald (21
September 2005). CCHR is a subsidiary of
the virulently anti-psychiatry Church of Scientology. It has no connection
with the Human Rights Commission. In 2004, CCHR toured the North Island with
a 40-metre display covering "various aspects of psychiatry from its Nazi
links to the black slave labour camps of South Africa". The most significant
recent development in almost 30 years of allegations of abuse at the Lake
Alice child and adolescent unit is the 2001 report of retired High Court
Judge Sir Rodney Gallen. After reviewing a clutch of allegations, Gallen
advised government, "I am satisfied that in the main the allegations
which have been made are true and reveal an appalling situation... The best
summary I can make is that the children concerned lived in a state of extreme
fear and hopelessness. Statement after statement indicates the child
concerned lived in a state of terror during the period they spent at Lake
Alice". The problem with
Gallen's conclusion is that the review on which it was based was not, and was
never intended to be, an investigation. He was merely asked to determine how
the $6.5 million allocated by Government for a settlement should be divided
up between the claimants. In the course of his review, Gallen read each
claimant's file as presented by group-action lawyer Grant Cameron, and met 41
of the 95 claimants. There were no provisions in the review process to guard
against false or exaggerated claims. The claimants, many of whom had
histories of crime and dishonesty, did not have to give evidence on oath.
They were not cross-examined. They did not have to face their alleged abusers
or anybody else who could challenge the veracity of their accounts. Gallen
did not advise the accused staff of the allegations against them. He did not
give the staff the opportunity to give evidence, or to call witnesses, or to
present documents in their own defence. Nonetheless, the fact
that a jurist of Gallen's stature had concluded that the claims were true
gave rise to a presumption that an objective, detailed investigation had
confirmed the existence of widespread, systemic abuse at Lake Alice. On this
deeply flawed basis, the Government eventually paid out $10.7 million
compensation to 183 former residents of Lake Alice, and the CCHR-led clamour
for Leeks' head rose to a crescendo. However, the history of
allegations of abuse at Lake Alice suggests that Gallen's conclusions need to
be treated with caution. In 1976, following the establishment of the Church
of Scientology in New Zealand, CCHR visited the child and adolescent unit at
Lake Alice and reported its findings to the media. There followed two
inquiries: a commission of inquiry conducted by a magistrate into "the
Case of the Niuean Boy" (aged 13); and an Ombudsman's inquiry into the
care and treatment of another teenage male in the unit (aged 15). Compared to Gallen's
2001 review, the two 1977 inquiries were timely and, in relation to the
complaints they were investigating, comprehensive. The commission heard
evidence and received submissions about relevant events between 1974 and 1976
from the Departments of Social Welfare and Health, Auckland Committee on
Racism and Discrimination, New Zealand Psychological Society, CCHR, New
Zealand College of Psychiatrists, two Polynesian advocacy groups and the
Values Party. The Commissioner also visited Lake Alice and conducted private
interviews with the Niuean boy, his parents and his grandmother (the family
did not want to be involved in the formal proceedings). For his inquiry, the
Ombudsman interviewed the complainant and his family, and all the officials
involved in the boy's care between 1973 and 1976. Both 1977 inquiries
related to complaints that boys were given electro-convulsive therapy (ECT)
as treatment, sometimes in unmodified form (ie without muscle relaxants or
anaesthetic), without their consent, and without the knowledge or consent of
their parents or guardians. Neither boy claimed he was given ECT as
punishment. There were no complaints about paraldehyde injections, physical
violence or sexual misconduct, or about ECT being applied to anywhere other
than the head. Both inquiries were authorised to consider the entire care and
treatment of the boys. In view of the sympathetic media coverage of their
cases, and the involvement of various advocacy groups, it seems likely that,
had they or any other former patients and their families wished to complain
about other matters, their complaints would have been heeded. It is therefore
significant that, during 1976-77, only two Lake Alice complainants came
forward, and neither of them complained about the violence and perversions
that would later feature in the allegations made to Gallen. So where did the
allegations to him come from? The notion that
psychiatric hospitals were dens of unrelenting brutality, sadism and
perversion didn't become a public issue in New Zealand until group-action
lawyers raised the stakes in the 1990s by providing the media with a
claimant's lurid allegations (and thereby providing other former patients
with a template on which to base their claims); by stating that the alleged
abuse was systemic and widespread, and that many other patients were
affected; by inviting claimants to join a group action; and by making
extravagant claims about the level of compensation to be expected. Sporadic media reports of
abuse in New Zealand youth institutions began to appear in 1997. In May, the
Dominion interviewed a former Lake Alice patient, and advised readers that
Wellington lawyer John Edwards was representing claimants who wanted
compensation and an apology ("...they were given electric shock
treatment and the drug paraldehyde, which causes extreme localised pain, as a
punishment"). By November 1997, the
number of Lake Alice claimants had risen to more than 40, and Cameron had
taken over the case. Thereafter, increasingly alarming allegations, and
increasingly hyperbolic estimates of the size of the claim, were reported in
the media. "Former child patients at Lake Alice mental hospital are
victims of one of the worst cases of systematic child torture this century,
says the Christchurch solicitor who is preparing a class action suit on their
behalf against the Crown. The claim totals about $38 million, but solicitor
Grant Cameron said that if other former patients joined the 90-odd already
involved, the amount could grow to $70 million." (Press, 19 December
1998). Cameron added, somewhat disingenuously, that, though the claimants had
had little contact with each other, they were telling remarkably similar
stories. By March 1999, the
number of Lake Alice claimants had risen to about 120 ("as a result of
publicity, and because his [Cameron's] firm had hired a private investigator
to track down others"). The claims were said to average $500,000 per
patient. (Dominion, 9 March 1999). Initially, the
government promised a speedy resolution. But, by 1999, the Minister of Health
had recognised the dangers inherent in uncritically accepting the claimant's
demands: "Mr Creech said the Crown's legal advisors believed many of the
Lake Alice claims were contestable ... the wisest course of action was to
"get it all into a legal environment" ... "We've got sympathy
for what happened to these people," he said, "but we need to
establish just how to manage this case in an area where it's going to create
a precedent because it's not just Lake Alice, it's also people who were in
Social Welfare homes and so on"" (Press, 17 March 1999). The government
subsequently allocated $6.5 million to settle the claim, and appointed Sir
Rodney Gallen to determine its distribution. By the time Cameron's $2.5
million legal fee was deducted, $4 million remained for the claimants. On the day of the
official Lake Alice settlement and apology, 8 October 2001, the government
urged any claimants who had not already come forward to do so. Additional
compensation funds were set aside for disbursement by Gallen. Prospective claimants
who weren't sure what to complain about would have found their answers in
Cameron's comments to the The Evening Standard next day: "Rape, sodomy
... the most appalling atrocities including applications of
electro-convulsive shock treatment to various parts of the body, including in
some cases, the genitals ... excruciating pain". Thereafter, any
allegation of abuse at Lake Alice, no matter how bizarre, was accepted by the
media and the public as established fact, and the careers and reputations of
former Lake Alice staff were effectively destroyed. Shortly after the
settlement, a spokesperson for the Royal Australian and New Zealand College
of Psychiatrists said of Leeks, "if there are sufficient facts for the
Prime Minister to apologise, let's see them so we can then kick him out"
(Evening Post, 16 October 2001). By 2004, the complainants were becoming
impatient: "Sharyn Collis says she started trying to get information
about whether charges would be laid straight after her 2001 apology and
compensation payment ... "The apology and compensation proves that the
government believed and accepted our evidence. Why is this taking so
long?"... Massey University clinical psychologist Jan Dickson is another
person who says the delays are "disgraceful". "The fact that
the government has apologised and compensation has been paid to the former
residents indicates that these things have happened, that the complaints are
a reality," Ms Dickson said" (Evening Standard, 23 March 2004). Over the same period,
group-action lawyers launched claims on the Lake Alice model against almost
every church and state youth institution in the country. Some claims have
resulted in costly out-of-court settlements; others have led to long and
expensive court battles. As Wyatt Creech predicted, the Lake Alice settlement
would have far-reaching consequences. |
