ACC has shamefully surrendered to the rants of a petulant sex-abuse industry and backed down over changes to the way claims are handled.© 2010 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd
The legislation is clear. Cover for sexual abuse depends on a sexual crime having been committed and a consequent mental injury. Evidence of that crime is the starting point for claims. Mental injury must be correctly diagnosed. Those fundamental criteria are being conveniently ignored. In the absence of evidence of the claimed crime, every counsellor who submits a sex abuse claim to ACC commits the offence of using a document to gain financial advantage.Counsellors are unable to detect sexual crimes. Most cannot diagnose mental injury. But based on their amateurish beliefs, assumptions and claims of competence, ACC accepted more than 120,000 sex abuse claims in the past 20 years. That must stop.
ACC must stick to its legislative guns and ensure all sex-abuse claims are based on testable evidence of the claimed abuse and correct diagnosis of mental injury by genuine mental health professionals. Only then can appropriate treatment be provided.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/4049555/Letter-ACC-has-buckled-to-the-crowd
As the tears of rage and uncontrollable anger continue to stream down my face. I have an offer for the writer of this letter. I would like him to talk to me, face-to-face so I can explain the effects of this 'industry" and the victims, survivors, their nearest and dearest. Or, if he prefers, I will most happily introduce him to the emergency end of our public health service. I KNOW that is no solution but such SHITE simply beggars me. I am so angry I can't think straight! As I observed nearly two years ago....show me the 8 year old that asks to be raped! I am going now because that letter was just too much for me. Aroha to you all. Be well and be strong!
ReplyDeleteNot at all a surprise to read this and not really worth commenting on. Gordon is a good friend of Dr. Goodyear-Smith and John Potter so comes from the same ideologies which are completely at odds with the "experts" including the mental health professionals.
ReplyDeletePlease remember that Gordon Waugh was a founding member of CoSA: Causalities of Sexual Allegations and has links to MENZ: Masculinist Evolution New Zealand. So his beliefs and stance on counseling are clear.
ReplyDeleteOn MENZ you'll find more of his letters to editors and an address to honors psychology students at Victoria University (this address goes over the reasons for his stance).
Try not to take this personally. I know that's almost impossible to do, but please try.
Anon... no child asks for abuse.
Kia kaha...
Take care,
CG
BACKGROUND to the article:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.peterellis.org.nz/FalseAllegations/NZAC/2006-0124_Waugh_SecondComplaint.pdf
"Your member Ms Barbara MILNE provided counselling services to my eldest daughter (Ms Suzette Marie WAUGH) beginning about March 1992 for the supposed effects of alleged sexual abuse. My middle daughter (Mrs Moira Cynthia MURRAY) also attended some of those counselling sessions, ostensibly to support her elder sister. In 1992, those two daughters were aged 33 and 32 years respectively. On 6 May 1992, Ms Waugh told my wife and I that Ms Milne was helping her to “recover her memories” of sexual abuse alleged to have occurred in her infancy and childhood."
"As a direct result of exposure to Ms Milne’s counselling, Ms Waugh suddenly made claims to my wife and I, that she had been assisted by Ms Milne to “recover her memories” of lurid and very extensive, serious, vile and disgusting long-term sexual abuse, from infancy to childhood, (but not in her adulthood) allegedly perpetrated by me, and by numerous other men.
While undergoing counselling by Ms Milne, Ms Waugh filed a complaint with the Takapuna police on 22 June 1992, alleging that I had indecently assaulted her many times during part of her childhood. Her sister, Mrs Murray, subsequently made a statement to the Howick Police on 15 July 1992, claiming to have detailed, substantive and personal knowledge of many of those alleged events. (Police File No 920629/3197 refers.)"
What is interesting to me is why were the girls not charged with making a false complaint? Do the girls who are around 50 years old still say the same story? What did the girls have to gain from pressing charges with the police? Afterall, like Gordon tells everyone they didn't need to do that to receive support from ACC. So what other possible reason would they of had??
ReplyDeleteThe guilty always seem to protect the loudest... as they have nothing to loose. No one hears or sees Peter Ellis writing letters to the newspapers every other week (if at all) and speaking at University's etc. How stupid does Gordon think we all are?