ACC continues to rob victims of support

Press release from Kyle Macdonald, NZAP

This week ACC has been forced to announce its true intention with the changes to the provision to ACC sensitive claims sexual abuse counselling: to cut costs with little regard for the welfare of it’s clients, the New Zealand public.
The new policy, confirmed only via a leaked email, confirms that ACC is now re-interpreting the law to exclude claims that have previously been approved, a cynical legal manoeuvre that can only be motivated by cost cutting.
Dr. Peter Jansen, along with other representatives of ACC have repeatedly stated that the changes to the ACC provision of sexual abuse counselling has been motivated by providing “best clinical practice.” This recent leaked information shows ACC’s true intent: to cut funding whenever they can find a way to justify it.
This approach, being both morally and ethically disturbing, is of great concern to expert clinicians who work in this field. Recent clinical experience shows that ACC is using questionable arguments to decline adults presenting with childhood sexual abuse claims, mostly built around the argument that the abuse occurred “too long ago” and “on the balance of probabilities most likely current life events have caused the current symptoms.” This despite the fact that symptoms have included flashbacks of the actual events of the abuse!
This approach to declining claims for childhood sexual abuse, and exiting clients whose abuse occurred prior to 1974, is having the cumulative effect of declining cover for the most severe cases of sexual abuse: those whose abuse occurred in their childhood years, and are still struggling under the terrible weight of these events many years into their adult life. Furthermore the progression and symptomatology of the effects of childhood sexual abuse are beyond question in the clinical literature and given that this group of clients are at high risk for suicide attempts, it is only a matter of time before ACC’s actions are called to question in a coroner’s court.
ACC’s actions are therefore both legally and clinically unjustifiable and the New Zealand Association of Psychotherapists on behalf of all of our clients implores the Government to step in and stop this madness.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1001/S00115.htm

ACC looking to revoke historic sexual abuse claims

Press release from Access Support Services

Access Support Services understands ACC are looking at stopping all entitlements to claimants who lodged sexual abuse claims under former Acts if the actual abuse occurred prior to the introduction of the ACC scheme in 1974. If this is the case then hundreds, if not thousands, of claimants suffering from a mental illness caused by sexual abuse will be exited from the ACC scheme.
“We already have one client affected by this policy and we understand ACC is currently reviewing other similar claims” said Mr Wadsworth, Head of Access Support Services.
It appears this new strategy to reduce liability is because ACC legislation prior to 1992 did not define the date of injury and ACC look likely to attempt to revoke cover for a significant number of people who have sensitive claims under the previous Acts.
“Access Support Services considers this policy change is wrong in law and its advocates will vigorously challenge any decision ACC makes to revoke cover for this group of claimants” said Mr Wadsworth. “If ACC do implement this new attack on claimants suffering from sexual abuse then, in my opinion, it will have blood on its hands.”
Access Support Services asks the Government intervene and put an end to what could end up being a grievous error in judgement by ACC’s management.
Access Support Services provides ACC claimants with a nationwide advocacy service.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1001/S00262.htm

70 percent of sexual abuse counselling claims declined by ACC in six month period

A press release from the Labour Party by Lynne Pillay

Nearly 800 people seeking counselling services to deal with sexual abuse were declined ACC assistance in just six months last year, Labour’s Victims Rights spokesperson Lynne Pillay says.
“Out of the 1026 people nationally who had their ACC claim for sexual abuse counselling processed between July and November last year just 331 people had their claims accepted while 795 (70 percent of the processed claims) had their claims declined.
“During that same period a further 941 decisions were pending,” Lynne Pillay said.
“Do we really want to be a country that won’t help people who have suffered through sexual abuse?
“The Government has turned their backs on survivors of sexual abuse with their cutbacks to services and the shoddy and shambolic approach they have taken to new guidelines.
“ACC Minister Nick Smith has repeatedly claimed that the changes to ACC sensitive claims are the result of clinical guidelines recommended by Massey University, but I note the University has publicly stated this is simply not the case.
“Nick Smith has said he will hold a review of sexual abuse counselling changes after six months. But in the meantime victims of horrendous sexual crimes are being forced to endure a cruel experiment in cut backs to counselling.
“People who have survived sexual abuse need support, but instead they are getting the bureaucratic run around from the National Government,” Lynne Pillay said.

http://www.labour.org.nz/news/70-percent-sexual-abuse-counselling-claims-declined-acc-six-month-period

ACC sexual abuse policy perturbs counsellors

An article from the Press by Tina Law

Victims of sexual abuse are missing out on counselling because of ACC changes, Christchurch counsellors say.
In October, the ACC changed the way sensitive claims are processed. It is now asking for a firm diagnosis showing mental injury caused by sexual abuse. Counsellors are not permitted to give that diagnosis.
Cathy McPherson, who has been a counsellor since 1986, said ACC had made it so difficult for sexual-abuse victims to get counselling that many who needed help were not seeking it. Those who did seek help were waiting a long time for the ACC to rule on their claims. "They're just sitting at home waiting for the ACC to make a decision."
McPherson said she had received just two referrals for sexual-abuse counselling since October. Before then, she was getting about five a week.
Psychotherapist Errol Hay said the changes to the ACC system were abhorrent, and she believed therapy was being constrained.
Labour's victims rights spokeswoman, Lynne Pillay, said nearly 800 people seeking counselling to deal with sexual abuse were declined ACC assistance between July and November last year, and 331 people had their claims accepted.
ACC senior medical adviser Peter Jansen said the corporation had a legislative requirement to help people recover from injuries after an accident. In cases of sexual abuse, it was often a mental injury, but in the past a person who had been abused had been able to receive help from the ACC without it determining the person had a mental injury or what exactly the mental injury was.
The ACC was now getting that information so it could ensure the person was getting the right help, Jansen said. He believed counsellors were unhappy because the ACC was not allowing them to make a diagnosis.
The corporation was following the 2003 Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act that said not everybody was qualified to undertake diagnosis, he said.
Hay said she was still waiting for the ACC to supply a list of people who were allowed to do the diagnosing in Christchurch.
Jansen said it was the ACC's aim to make claims decisions within seven days, but he was not sure how long it would take to reach that goal.
Before October, the average processing time was nearly nine months, which was the legislative requirement and was inadequate, he said.
McPherson said counsellors believed the new measures were about cost-cutting, rather than making sure people got the right help.
Figures released under the Official Information Act show clients of the ACC's sensitive claims unit cost taxpayers nearly $58 million in the year to last June 30, compared with $48.5m in the previous year. Counselling made up $14.4m of that figure.

© 2010 Fairfax New Zealand Limited
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/3216906/ACC-sexual-abuse-policy-perturbs-counsellors

Focus of ACC review of sex-abuse claims must be on fairness

An editorial from the Press

When ACC changed the way in which it handled sexual-abuse claims last October the move was sharply criticised by many counsellors and psychotherapists.
They argued that victims would find it more difficult to get the treatment they required, with the accusation, in the context of the economies being sought elsewhere in ACC, that the new regime was introduced as a cost-cutting measure.
Both ACC and its minister, Nick Smith, rejected the attacks. But, in an apparent effort to mollify critics of the new system, Smith did promise that an independent clinical assessment of it would be carried out in April this year, after the regime had been in operation for six months.
It was a sound move to order this review. This should establish whether the new system used by ACC's sensitive claims unit is operating in a manner which is transparent and robust.
There is little doubt that the old system of dealing with sexual-abuse claims was in need of reform. In the year to last June the cost to the taxpayer of sensitive claims unit clients leapt by about 20 per cent to $58 million, including $14m on counselling, despite a drop in the number of new claims accepted.
It also transpired that five counselling arrangements had lasted between 12 and 14 years at a cost for each in the past five years of up to $500,000. The inevitable suspicion was that the criteria for handling sensitive claims had been interpreted too laxly.
Under the new clinical pathway regime, sexual-abuse victims' claims would be accepted only after a firm diagnosis had been made that they had a mental injury and that this was due to abuse.
There had always been a requirement that ACC could only accept claims following a diagnosis of mental injury, but this had been less rigorously applied in the past.
The stronger application of this requirement might help to explain why, of the 152 referrals received by ACC since last October, just nine have been accepted, with a dozen rejected and the remainder put on hold until additional information about the cases had been obtained.
The new system is also based on short-term and focused treatment for those whose claims had been accepted and ensuring that victims do not become reliant on their counselling.
ACC cited research which showed that the optimum number of counselling sessions for adults with mental injuries caused by sexual abuse was 16.
Although ACC is adamant that this is not a treatment cap and that those who were assessed as needing further sessions would get them, critics believe that it will lead to a reduction in the number of victims receiving longer term treatment.

The terms of reference for the review in April have yet to be released. But a priority must be ensuring that ACC has proceeded with its more rigorous application of the diagnostic test.
The review team, however, must also assess whether any victims who genuinely do require counselling because of sexual abuse are being turned down. This is a sensitive issue for victims, many of whom have been living with memories of abuse for many years. It is never easy to come forward and seek assistance.
Another role for the review should be ensuring that the length of treatment is appropriate. ACC understandably wants to avoid longer term victim dependence on counselling. There will be some victims, however, who will need weekly counselling for many years.
A key question here is whether this should continue to be funded by ACC or whether in long-term cases this should be provided through the health or justice systems.
ACC has long been a cornerstone of New Zealand's broader welfare system. But it is essential that there is confidence that ACC is fair to both the taxpayers and levy payers who fund the system and to those who genuinely require assistance.
With respect to cases in which mental injuries have been caused by sexual abuse the independent review in April should determine whether confidence in the system is warranted or not.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/editorials/3216886/Editorial-Focus-of-ACC-review-of-sex-abuse-claims-must-be-on-fairness