Translate This Page
This is a copy of the submission the HEAR.group (now disbanded) put into theN.C.P.S. for the Patrick Parkinson Review . 10 months later we got a very generic reply . I have to laugh when I hear it referred to as Professional. They keep no statistics have no Idea of normal commercial Courtesies and as is becoming obvious their stock tools in trade are Ignorance Arrogance and Bullying.
I have only one reason for writing on this Forum and that is I have seen Two pedo priests off loaded in my parish St Brigids Healesville. My son was sexually abused by one of them all my attempts to dialogue with the church from parish priest to Office of the Holy Sea. have met with arrogance and Ignorance the Hierarchs have proven time and time again they don’t give a stuff about Healesville. This was proven yet again when they approved a self confessed sodomozer of a Sixteen year old boy on to the altar to say the Easter Liturgies. This leaves me with deep seated fears for the safety of all children in the catholic system and it is time we took a leaf out of Irelands book and stood up to these thugs
HEAR
Healesville Education and
Awareness Raising re Clergy
Professional Misconduct and Abuse GROUP NOW DISBANDED .
9th January 2009
Attn: Professor Patrick Parkinson
Professional Standards Review
PO Box 308
Kensington NSW 1465
Dear Professor Parkinson,
Our organisation, Healesville Education and Awareness Raising re Clergy Professional Misconduct and Sexual Abuse (HEAR) was formed by a group of people whose health, lives and relationships have been affected by not only clergy sexual abuse but also by its aftermath.
1. We have been contacted by many victims/survivors who have been through the Towards Healing and Melbourne Response processes and we are concerned about …
the initial interrogation of victims by personnel such as an ex-police officer and/or a priest.
We believe that whoever receives this initial information needs to be an independent specially qualified professional who is trained to understand the additional trauma of such a disclosure and the way in which reactions and attitudes can trigger a victim.
the absence of a case manager/ support person assigned to victims/survivors who can explain the procedures and processes, keep them informed, answer their questions and monitor their progress and well being during this incredibly stressful time.
We hear of the pain of incredible stress and frustration from victims/survivors whose calls go unanswered, who are left for months without information and who find themselves unsupported during confronting and difficult meetings with church personnel and lawyers. We support the inclusion of a set maximum length for the whole process as recommended by the Cumberlage report in the UK.
the lack of statistics kept by all Church processes victims working with offenders and/or victims. Brian Lucas of the Professional Standards Committee assures us it is too troublesome to collect such information.
We are at a loss to know how anyone can trust any organisation that does not keep basic statistics regarding its operation. There appears to be no accountability or transparency regarding these processes. Whilst obviously privacy must be maintained, numbers of victims and perpetrators, ages and sex of victims, modus operandi of offenders, regions, dioceses histories, states, trends and circumstances etc can be correlated to assist in identifying risks, providing targeted education and prevention measures for the safety of both priests and parishioners.
Brian Lucas’ argument that such statistics can’t be kept because there is no agreed definition of sexual abuse suggests that the Church is still of the opinion that a certain level of sexual misconduct towards children and the vulnerable is permissible. We believe that any situation where a priest has breached the boundaries set by the Profession Standards Committee in Integrity of Ministry should be recorded. Grooming behaviours are abusive in themselves. Victims have told us they feel as much anger and pain over the way they were manipulated and their ongoing feelings of powerlessness in the relationship with the perpetrator as they do about the actual sexual contact.
2. Some of us attended Angela Ryan’s talk regarding the materials for Our Church: A Safe Community - A Shared Commitment in 2008. We are particularly concerned that in this package…
the focus is on family violence and abuse which, whilst of course
being extremely important, is surely not the jurisdiction of the
National Committee for Professional Standards, when there are many
Catholic organisations already involved in addressing these issues in
the community who are better qualified to do this.
includes homily notes in which we are told that ‘Jesus’ death and
resurrection gives us the hope to help us endure suffering’ and that
‘God… will be with us to support us and strengthen us in all
circumstances.’
How do victims of clergy abuse interpret this? That the Church believes that their suffering must just be endured? Where was God when his representative was abusing them? If he didn’t support them in that circumstance - then what? If priests and bishops seem to choose to protect perpetrators and exhort victims not to ‘dwell crankily on old wounds’ then how will God support and strengthen the victims? Are not the priests and bishops supposed to do the work of God here on Earth? Should they not be extending God’s support to the victims.
The focus on family violence and on parents need to protect children may be construed as blaming parents for failing to protect their children from offenders.
Whilst it is very important to educate parents to recognise grooming behaviours and warning signs, such suggestions perpetuate the victims and their families shouldering the guilt and shame of clergy sexual abuse instead of it being placed where it belongs – with the offender. When victims and their families accept the guilt and shame, they keep abuse quiet and this protects offenders, prevents disclosure and makes other unsuspecting families and victims vulnerable to the offender in the future. The NCPS should be trying to prevent, not preserve and perpetuate this problem.
3. Blaming the victim is a very common phenomenon used by humans as a defence mechanism when we are feeling threatened. We believe many of the Church’s responses to victims and ‘whistle blowers’ fall into this category. Catholic Principals, Pastoral workers and parishioners with little or no guidance from the hierarchy or professional development from professional agencies do not know how to respond to concerns raised about breaches of Integrity in Ministry. We have heard complaints that…
There are no clear procedures for a teacher or parishioner to raise
concerns about a priest breaching the guidelines of Integrity in
Ministry.
Most principals, teachers and parishioners do not even know of the document ‘Integrity in Ministry’.
Principals and teachers in Catholic schools are
- not trained to understand grooming behaviour,
- nervous to complain about their employer in case they lose their jobs,
- told to say a priest is sick and keep knowledge of allegations of clergy abuse from the parents of the children at a school.
Victims and their families can be vilified and ostracised and gossiped
about by parishioners with no arena of safety created for discussion in
a parish.
Parishes are not supported by professionals to deal with the aftermath of allegations or convictions
The families of children who have been ‘at risk’ with a convicted
offender have not been given important information to assist them in
their ongoing care and support of their children - e.g. professional
assistance in understanding the affects of abuse, handling disclosure
and understanding patterns of disclosure etc.
Despite the NCPS sending all parishes and Catholic schools the Our
Church: A Safe Community - A Shared Commitment packages in 2007, we have
been told by both priests and principals that they did not use them
because they did not have…
(a) any instructions as to how they should be used,
(b) the expertise to carry them out or
(c) the personnel, resources or time to implement the activities suggested even if they did have
(a) and (b)
We urge the review panel to ask Australian independent experts such as ‘Childwise’ (whose graphic showing a safe community is used in the NCPS package) to assist in this review to discuss best practice for the education of priests, principals, parents and all parishioners as a proactive measure to create safe environments. We also urge a recommendation of the provision of adequate funding for full ongoing training.
We attach copies of emails to and from Brian Lucas regarding these issues, a copy of the London Ontario Safe Environment Policy and include a DVD of workshops for priests, parish workers, parishioners and parents held by the London Diocese. We also request that you send us an email address to which we may send you a highlighted copy of the Cumberlage Report from the UK - a good example of world’s best practice in both supporting victims and creating safe environments.
Should you require any further information please contact us as we are very keen to be heard and value the opportunity to voice both our concerns and our vision of a Child Safe Church in the future.
We would like to express our dismay that many victims who have contacted us knew nothing about this review and when they tried to contact the NCPS office for details it was closed for the holidays. We wonder why victims have not been contacted for input and why the timeline for response is so tight around the holiday period, which has prevented their consultation with the office.
Yours sincerely
Pam Krstic, Ian Lawther and Carmel Rafferty
Cheers Ian Lawther.
Thanks For your reply James,
There are many secular companies that will go around to schools to teach
students and staff what to look out for ,Childwize being probably the
most notetable of them but most of them report having trouble getting
into the mick system .They teach the Kids how to listen to their own
bodies , Goose bumps, sweaty palms etc. I will Post some info here at
the end. I was in the park with one of my Grandkids the other day and a
woman started a conversation with me and I knew she was checking me out,
was it my grandchild? ,did I live around there? did I have other kids?
Just smalltalk Checking me out she even said to my Grandson oooh is this
your Grandpa. I knew She was checking me out and I thanked her for it.
We had quite a long conversation about Child Safety after that and we
both agreed that it is a shame it has got to the stage in society that a
parent could not go into a park and feel as though they were being
watched She assured me that mothers feel the same way especially if a
child has a bruise on them.
Heres the Link------
James we started the Hear group thinking we would be able to get some
Proactive dialogue going with the church we were quite unprepared for
the Ignorace and the arrogance we have come up against from the
hierarchs at every turn I include a copy of some correspondence between
Brian Lucas and myselfto show you that I have tried
Hi Brian,sorry about the delay but this computer work is plain hard
yakka for me.thank you for your prompt reply,in response to your letter,
may I respectfully suggest that the church could leave the
interpetration,of the meaning of sexual abuse , to the police. I'm sure
this would speed the process up for victims.Maybe the collection of data
is complicated but the longest journey starts with the first step and
the failure of any proffessional standards body to take this step can
only make onlookers wonder just how big is the problem.I have spoken to
many child protection agencies over the last 6 months and the one thing
they all say is that it is impossible to get into the catholic
system.The only diocese I know of, that has taken positive steps to
protect children,is Rockhampton(Bishop Heenen with Childwise).If there
are others could you please let me know.Bishop Fabbro and Father Sharp
of the London Diocese in Canada have introduced a program called
Isolation to Action which has an excellent section on the recognition of
grooming behaviour.
If the Church were to adopt a policy to train all staff in the
recognition of grooming behaviour(and gaurantee them their jobs would be
safe if they reported any suspicions) Sorry mate had to add that I've
seen so much of the shoot the messenger syndrome that seems endemic in
the catholic system.The positive side to this is all the children would
be safer, the churchs credibility would start to improve and predators
would be less likely to attempt anything on church property.I will send
some emails after this which will hopefully be interesting to you my IT
skills are minimal and I dont know how to attach any thing.Once again
Brian there is no animosity intended in this letter .I wish you all the
best.
Ian Lawther.
----- O
briginal Message -----
From: Fr Brian Lucas
To: Ian &/or Pam
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 11:40 AM
Subject: RE: angela ryan talk
Dear Ian,
Thank you for this comment. It is less a case of ‘not bothering’ but given the independence of dioceses and especially the independence of religious orders it is not easy to have reliable national statistics. This is compounded by problems of actually defining what we mean by sexual abuse in its various forms and then groups applying the right definitions to particular facts. With what we do know there is a conscious effort to eliminate risk and to assist those affected.
Fr Brian Lucas
General Secretary
Australian Catholic Bishops Conference
G.P.O. BOX 368
CANBERRA 2601
Cheers Ian Lawther:- |