|
|
Allegations
of Abuse in Institutions |
|
|
|
|
Court-awarded damages
should not be like Lotto, a lawyer for Wellington nuns being sued for
$550,000, has said. Making Sisters of Mercy
pay damages would be like making parents pay damages for the way a child was
raised, which courts had always been reluctant to do except in cases
involving physical safety, lawyer Chris Finlayson said. A woman who lived with
the Sisters of Mercy at St Joseph's Orphanage, Upper Hutt, from 1968 to 1973,
wants damages from four Catholic organisations. The woman, 45, whose
name is suppressed, says she was emotionally, verbally, physically, and
sexually abused while in their care. She boarded at St
Mary's College, also run by Sisters of Mercy, from 1974-76, and was a day
girl in 1977. She has been granted
legal aid to sue the Sisters of Mercy (Wellington) Trust Board, St Joseph's
Orphanage Trust Board, Wellington's Roman Catholic Archdiocese, and its
social agency, Catholic Social Services, in the High Court at Wellington. All four defendants
oppose the claim on factual and legal grounds. Mr Finlayson, the
lawyer for the nuns and the orphanage trust board, yesterday told Justice
Frater that no damages were justified, but if anything was awarded it should
only be enough to put her back in the position she would have been in had the
alleged actions not taken place. He said a major issue
would be whether they should be responsible for damage stemming from the
claimant's poor early home life and her parents abandoning her. Damages were not some
kind of Lotto, he said. The claimant is a beneficiary with two sons, and now
lives in Australia. She has been diagnosed as suffering various mental and
emotional disorders. Mr Finlayson said the
Sisters of Mercy Trust Board was to be judged according to the general standard
of the late 1960s and early 70s. The board stood behind
the actions of any sister, dead or alive. A former boarding
mistress at St Mary's when the claimant was there denied an assault the
claimant alleged in her evidence. The nun, whose name is suppressed, said she
felt sorry for the claimant when she did not know where Catholic Social
Services had arranged to send her for school holidays. She was referred to a
CSS social worker's file notes about the claimant, but said she did not
remember talking to the social worker about the claimant being
institutionalised, deprived, having behaviour problems, or a poor
relationship with the sister. She continues giving evidence today. |
