|
|
Allegations
of Abuse in Institutions |
|
|
|
|
News that police have
found no evidence of criminal offending by Dr Selwyn Leeks, former head of
the adolescent unit at Lake Alice Hospital, has been greeted with dismay by
the Citizens Commission on Human Rights. “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,
said. Citizens Commission on
Human Rights (CCHR), it should be noted, is a subsidiary of the virulently
anti-psychiatry Church of Scientology. It has no connection with the Human
Rights Commission, which is a government agency. In relation to the Lake
Alice allegations, CCHR appears to have a point. The most significant recent
development in almost 30 years of allegations of abuse at the Lake Alice unit
is the 2001 report of retired High Court judge Rodney Gallen. After reviewing
a clutch of allegations, Sir Rodney advised the Government, “I am satisfied
that in the main the allegations which have been made are true and reveal an
appalling situation. . . . the children concerned lived in a state of extreme
fear and hopelessness.” The problem with Sir Rodney’s
conclusion is that the review on which it was based was not, and was never
intended to be, an investigation. Sir Rodney was merely asked to determine
how the $6.5 million compensation allocated should be distributed. In the course of his
review, Sir Rodney read each claimant’s file as presented by lawyer Grant
Cameron, and met 41 of the 95 claimants. There were no provisions in the
review 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 anyone who
could challenge the veracity of their accounts. Former staff were not advised
of the allegations against them; they never had the opportunity to give
evidence, to call witnesses, or to present documents in their own defence. Nonetheless, the fact
that a jurist of Sir Rodney’s stature had concluded that the claims were true
created the presumption that a careful investigation had confirmed the
existence of widespread abuse at Lake Alice. On this basis, the Government
eventually paid $10.7 million to 183 former residents, and the CCHR-led
clamour for Dr Leeks’ head rose to a crescendo. However, the history of
allegations against the adolescent unit at Lake Alice suggests that Sir
Rodney’s conclusions need to be treated with caution. In 1976, following the
establishment of the Church of Scientology in New Zealand, CCHR visited Lake
Alice and reported its findings to the media. There followed two
inquiries: a commission conducted by a magistrate into “the case of the
Niuean boy” (aged 13); and an Ombudsman’s inquiry into the care of another
lad (aged 15). Compared to Sir Rodney Gallen’s 2001 review, the two 1977
inquiries were timely and, in relation to the complaints they considered,
comprehensive. The commission received
submissions and heard evidence from the Departments of Social Welfare and
Health, New Zealand Psychological Society, New Zealand College of
Psychiatrists, the Values Party and four advocacy groups. The Commissioner
visited Lake Alice, viewed the film One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and
conducted private interviews with the Niuean boy and his family (who did not
want to take part 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. Both 1977 inquiries
concerned complaints that boys were given electro-convulsive therapy (ECT) as
treatment, sometimes in unmodified form (i.e. without muscle relaxants or
anaesthetic), without their consent, and without the knowledge or consent of
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, and the involvement of advocacy groups, it
seems likely that, had the complainants or any other former patients or 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 complained about the violence
and perversions that later featured in the allegations to Sir Rodney Gallen. So where did the
allegations to Sir Rodney come from? The notion that psychiatric hospitals
were dens of brutality, sadism and perversion was promulgated in the 1970s by
books and films like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and fostered by CCHR
and other groups. But the notion didn’t become a public issue in New Zealand
until group-action lawyers raised the stakes in the 1990s, by making lurid
allegations to the media (and thereby providing a template on which claimants
could base their claims); by stating that the alleged abuse was widespread;
by inviting prospective complainants to join a group action; and by making
extravagant claims about the compensation to be expected. Sporadic 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 that 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, there
were more than 40 claimants, and Mr Cameron had taken over the case.
Thereafter, increasingly alarming allegations, and increasingly hyperbolic
estimates of the size of the claim, were reported. By March 1999, the
number of claimants had risen to about 120. The claims were said to average
$500,000 per patient. Initially, the Government
promised a speedy resolution, but by 1999 the-then National Party minister of
health had recognised the danger of uncritically accepting the claimants’
demands: “Mr [Wyatt] Creech said the Crown’s legal advisors believed many of
the Lake Alice claims were contestable . . . ”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.“ The-then opposition
leader Helen Clark deplored the Government’s “shameful” treatment of the
claimants, and promised that a Labour government would spare them further
trauma. The subsequent allocation of $6.5 million to settle the claim, and
the appointment of Sir Rodney Gallen to determine its distribution, was the
result. By the time Mr
Cameron’s $2.5 million legal fee was deducted, $4 million remained for the
claimants. On the day of the settlement and apology in October 2001, the
Government urged Lake Alice claimants who had not already come forward to do
so. Additional compensation was set aside for disbursement by Sir Rodney. Prospective claimants
who weren’t sure what to complain about would have found their answers in Mr
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 as
established fact. Shortly after the settlement, a spokesperson for the Royal
Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists said of Dr Selwyn Leeks,
“if there’s sufficient facts for the Prime Minister to apologise, let’s see
them so we can then kick him out.” By 2004, complainants
seeking the prosecution of Dr Leeks were becoming impatient. 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 Mr Creech predicted,
the Lake Alice settlement would have far-reaching consequences.
|
