ACC cover to extend to child victims of sexual grooming

A press release from the New Zealand Government

ACC Minister Judith Collins today announced an addition to the Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill that would extend ACC sensitive claims cover to children or young people who are victims of sexual grooming or indecent communications.
“There is a gap in the current ACC law that needs addressing to establish cover for victims of these types of child sexual exploitation,” Ms Collins says.
“Our Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill targets criminals who prey on children, either by feeding the supply or fuelling the demand for the insidious underground child sexual abuse market.
“This proposal will ensure ACC cover is provided for mental injury caused by the Bill’s new offence of indecent communication with a young person, as well as cover for the existing offence of sexual grooming.”
Ms Collins says the proposal supports ACC’s new strategy for action on sexual violence that focuses on prevention, first response and quality services to help victims of sexual violence.
Just recently ACC announced its Mates & Dates pilot that aims to prevent sexual and dating violence by helping young people to understand the value of healthy relationships based on respect, negotiation and consent.
A further addition to the Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill will ensure that any person convicted of indecently communicating with a young person is restricted from working in core children’s workforce roles. The Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill is currently awaiting its second reading in Parliament.

© 2014 Scoop Media

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1407/S00647/acc-cover-to-extend-to-child-victims-of-sexual-grooming.htm

ACC compo policy 'wrong in law'

An article from the New Zealand Herald by Martin Johnston

Form requesting signature to consent to information with threat of compensation cut is deemed unlawful.
A judge has overturned ACC's policy of cutting off accident claimants' compensation if they refuse to approve widespread gathering of information about themselves. The Accident Compensation Corporation's actions were "without basis and wrong in law", District Court Judge Grant Powell says in two just-released verdicts. The decisions come 2 years after ACC's mass privacy breach.
ACC, asked yesterday if it was following the judge's advice to rewrite the ACC167 form, said the form was "not illegal". ACC was "amending the relevant processes to address the matters raised by the court". ACC argued before the court cases that the blanket consent form provided "administrative efficiency".
Claimants Denise Powell, a part-time university lecturer who had a back injury, and "K", a sexual abuse victim and brain injury claimant, appealed against ACC cutting off their entitlements after they repeatedly refused to sign the ACC167 form. Their entitlements were reinstated after they eventually signed but they said they only signed because they were put under duress. Both claimants previously had arrangements with ACC to give it consent to obtain specific information relating to their claims case-by-case. This system ran for several years until 2009 and 2010 when case managers indicated the corporation could no longer accept those arrangements and they would have to sign the form or lose their entitlements.
But Judge Powell said the ACC167 form was much broader in its consent to gather information than the requirement in the Accident Compensation Act that claimants approve the release of "medical and other records that may be relevant to the claim". ACC was justified to seek a wide range of information and could request consent for this from claimants. But it could use section 117/3 of the act to cut off entitlements for refusing consent only for the "medical and other records" specified in the act, and not for the wider information search that ACC167 enabled.
The judge cites, as an example of the kind of wider information sought, Dr Powell's ACC case manager asking her GP if the medical certificates he wrote accurately reflected the amount of work she was capable of doing. "It would appear," the case manager wrote, "that the hours both paid and unpaid combined could almost exceed a full week's work. If you do not agree will you please provide your reasons."
Dr Powell, an ACC claimants' support group spokeswoman, said the case manager's letter was inappropriate and after a complaint she was assigned to a different case manager. "K" told the corporation he was concerned about its use or possible misuse of private information including details about his sensitive claim with ACC.
Warren Forster, the advocate for both claimants, said there had been a long line of failed appeals against having ACC payments stopped because of refusing to sign the ACC167 form, but there had not been full legal argument on the issue before the K and Powell cases. ACC is setting up a dedicated phone line for clients with historical consent concerns.

• ACC consent concern line 0800 745 254.

Form filling
• ACC167 form asked claimants to sign: "I give my consent for information about me to be collected, used and disclosed..."
• The Accident Compensation Act says: "A claimant who receives any entitlement must, when reasonably required to do so by the corporation...authorise the corporation to obtain medical and other records that may be relevant to the claim."
• What the judge said: "In my view, even a casual glance at the ACC167 form...shows that the authorisation is considerably more extensive than provided by section 72, 1, c [of the act]."

© 2014 APN New Zealand Ltd

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11238207

Judge criticises ACC act as unfair

An article from the Dominion Post by Shane Cowlishaw

After Coral Waitere had a new oven installed, she filled up the sink to do some dishes.
But the electrician who set up the oven had left the house unearthed, so when she turned on the tap she was blasted across the kitchen by 240 volts of electricity. The current that surged through her body blew a hole just below her lip where it exited.
Temporarily paralysed, burnt and left with brain injuries, Ms Waitere, of Alexandra, was unable to work after the 2005 accident. But because she was unemployed at the time, she was not eligible for weekly compensation from ACC. She is one of six ACC claimants, some of who were sexually abused as children, who have lost their legal battle against the corporation.
The group took their case to the High Court, but were turned down by Justice Stephen Kos, despite him noting that the outcomes under the ACC Act were "unquestionably anomalous".
Under the act, only individuals who are employed at the time of their injury are entitled to full weekly compensation. They are still eligible for treatment costs. People injured as children are eligible for a reduced weekly compensation sum based on a loss of potential earnings. Three of the four injured as children receive this compensation, but believe they should be entitled to the full amount.
The two claimants who were injured as adults receive no weekly compensation at all, including Ms Waitere, who was injured the day before she was due to start work after taking time off to raise her children. She said the High Court decision, and the others ruling against her during four years of legal action, had "made me want to cry".
Another of the claimants, who was sexually and physically abused by her ex-husband, said ACC had cut off her compensation in February. It made life extremely tough for her and her three children, who had also suffered abuse, she said.
Lawyer John Miller, who represented the group, said it was ridiculous that children who were injured while not working could be in a situation where they were denied adequate compensation for life. In essence, Justice Kos was saying the act was unfair, and that such a situation would never be allowed in the private insurance industry, he said. While preparing for the case, he looked through the transcripts of debates and select committee hearings related to drafting the act, and no discussions had taken place about the potential problems arising from this clause.
ACC Minister Judith Collins said the eligibility criteria of the act were designed to apply to a wide range of circumstances. There were special provisions to deal with unique situations when the rules were not appropriate, and the eligibility criteria would be reviewed next year.
"The eligibility criteria are challenged from time to time where applying the law may be considered unfair to claimants.
"I take issues of unfair treatment very seriously, and pay close attention to these issues when they arise."

THE SIX CLAIMANTS
HANS KOGLER - Severely injured in a motor vehicle accident in 1991, aged 16, and had his left leg amputated. He found fulltime work in 2003 but had to give it up after 10 months because of continuing problems with his injury.
RW - As a child he was sexually abused in the 1970s and 80s. He later found work but had to stop in 2007 because of issues stemming from the abuse.
RN - Suffered severe sexual abuse from the age of 12. She did not report the events at the time and first sought treatment for the consequences at the age of 28. As she was over 18 when the abuse was reported, she does not receive weekly compensation.
SA - Suffered sexual, physiological and physical abuse at the hands of her husband between 1994 and 2006. She began working in 2007 and was diagnosed with post-traumatic and major stress disorders in 2009.
CORAL WAITERE - Unemployed between 1999 and 2005, but later found employment at the Nelson Nursing Service. The day before she started work she suffered a severe electrical shock.
VALERIE MURRAY - Injured while a schoolgirl in 1976. She began working in 1979 and, more than 20 years later, had to stop as a result of the injury. Initially she was granted weekly compensation based on her income, but ACC reconsidered and reduced her compensation by $231 per week to that of a "potential earner".

© 2013 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9437185/Judge-criticises-ACC-act-as-unfair

Question to Minister

Question 3: Katrina Shanks (National) to the Minister of Justice: What steps is the Government taking to support victims of sexual violence?



Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice): The Government is committed to providing better support for victims of crime, including all victims of sexual violence. As a result of the Law Commission’s recent review of the Evidence Act, I will shortly be introducing proposals to improve the way some evidence is dealt with in these cases. If the defence wants to raise issues about a complainant’s previous sexual history, they will need to give notice before trial. In addition, child witnesses under the age of 18 will be able to give evidence by video recording, which can be challenged in trial. They will be able to have a support person sitting nearby when they give evidence. There is a range of support services for sexual violence victims across the Government. They include specialist victim support, no real limitation period on the making of a complaint, automatic name suppression in criminal proceedings, and the court is closed when victims give evidence. Victims can give evidence behind a screen, and they are allowed a support person with them in court while giving evidence, and there is a range of counselling and financial support through the Ministry of Justice, ACC support, or the Ministry of Social Development, including funding of agencies such as Doctors for Sexual Abuse Care, Auckland Sexual Abuse Helpline, and Wellington Rape Crisis. The Victims of Crime Reform Bill, which is awaiting its second reading, will also introduce a new victims’ code.
Katrina Shanks: What criminal processes exist to deal with sexual violence offences?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: In New Zealand we have a common law justice system based on democratic principles of fairness. Some European and former communist countries have a different system, the inquisitorial method of criminal justice, which effectively means that any accused person has to prove their innocence. Accused persons are examined directly by judges trained in the inquisitorial method of examination. There is limited ability to challenge evidence presented to the judge. In the common law method, prosecution and defence each present their evidence and arguments to the court, and have the right to challenge each other’s evidence. In 2012 the Law Commission published an issues paper and invited submissions on a range of pre-trial and trial processes, particularly to consider whether inquisitorial processes could be incorporated into our justice system for sexual offences. Some of the issues considered have been advanced, such as child protection orders, greater use of restorative justice to deal with sexual violence offences, protection for child witnesses, and requiring notice to be given if the defence intends to raise evidence of the complainant’s prior sexual history.
Katrina Shanks: What else is the Government doing to help prevent sexual violence victimisation?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Prevention is obviously the key for progress in this matter. Sexual violence is obviously abhorrent but it is also linked with alcohol and other drugs. The Government’s alcohol reform legislation comes into force on 18 December. From 18 December this year it will be an offence to supply alcohol to a minor without parental consent. In addition, the Government has passed the Psychoactive Substances Act to stop the sale of harmful party pills. The Ministry of Health funds a rape prevention programme in schools called BodySafe, which is currently run in many schools and teaches young people how to keep themselves safe from sexual violence and how to deal with a sexual attachment if it does happen. Earlier this year, Minister Bennett announced a major funding boost for victims of sexual violence through agencies such as the Auckland Sexual Abuse Help Foundation. In addition, ACC is redesigning its support, assessment, and treatment services for sensitive claims to provide more responsive services to victims of sexual violence. Sadly, many victims of sexual violence are repeat victims, and part of the approach is to help victims keep safe to prevent re-victimisation. There is a good deal currently being done to deal with sexual violence in this community, and it is a real problem that affects old and young. We need to continue to bring offenders to justice and to acknowledge that sexual violence is a crime and needs to be dealt with accordingly.

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/business/qoa/50HansQ_20131112_00000003/3-crime-victims-sexual-offences%E2%80%94support

Judge admits law unfair to abuse victim

An article from the Dominion Post by Shaun Cowlishaw

A mother who suffered more than a decade of physical and sexual abuse at the hands of her husband has been denied ACC cover because of a technicality.
The Christchurch woman, who cannot be named, married in 1994 and her husband soon began to display abusive behaviour. That escalated into continual sexual, psychological and physical abuse until she left him 12 years later.
The couple's three children were also subjected to sexual abuse and in 2009 the man was sentenced to five years in jail for offences against the family.
Speaking to The Dominion Post, the woman said the details at the trial of her former husband's abuse were so horrific that she suffered a breakdown soon after and was diagnosed with severe depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.
She was granted cover for mental injury but ACC declined to continue weekly compensation because it claimed she was a non-earner when she began counselling in 2007.
In a written district court decision, Judge David Ongley dismissed the woman's appeal despite describing her situation as a "plainly unfair result".
The situation had been caused by the "collision" of two rules affecting entitlement to weekly compensation, he said.
One rule stated that the claimant had to be an earner at the date of injury and incapacity.
But a second rule meant that the date of the injury, in the case of mental injury caused by certain criminal acts, is the date on which the claimant received treatment for that injury.
The woman's application for weekly compensation could only prove that she worked until March 13, 2007, while her first date for counselling for symptoms of mental illness was on April 30, 2007.
With her two daughters still at home, the woman said the decision would have a crippling effect on a strained family.
"I'm sick of having to pay for other people's mistakes, I'm trying to hold the family together and it's not working out very well and now I have this horrible financial burden."
Judge Ongley noted that in many cases someone who suffered mental injury caused by sexual abuse may experience increasingly severe symptoms years after the abuse. That meant it was likely they might be a non-earner when first seeking treatment.
"To add to the unfairness of her situation, it appears that [the woman] had worked to support her family because of the financial irresponsibility of her husband, and that she was not working at various times because she was dealing with problems that her children had suffered from family abuse by their father, including alleged sexual abuse."
But Judge Ongley accepted that ACC had made all the inquiries that could be expected in light of the information presented.
Leading ACC lawyer John Miller, who represented the woman in her appeal, said about 200 people were in a similar position. The situation had been caused by a particular High Court decision that ACC ignored until it suddenly decided to enforce it, he said. Mr Miller was preparing a case involving 30 claimants that would challenge that point of law.
ACC declined to comment.

© 2013 Fairfax NZ News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/8192572/Judge-admits-law-unfair-to-abuse-victim

ACC sensitive claims monitoring report a “fail” mark

A press release from the New Zealand Association of Psychotherapists by Kyle MacDonald

The 18 month follow up monitoring report of the ACC Sensitive Claims Clinical Pathway shows clearly that only three of the 14 recommendations have been fully met.
“I consider this a fail mark” says Kyle MacDonald. “This report demonstrates how victims of sexual abuse and assault are still struggling to access the support they are entitled to as a direct result of the National Government led cost cutting drive in 2009. The fallout of this ill-informed policy is still being felt.”
The report details some areas of improvement, but strong concerns remain around the use of external ACC appointed assessors, implemented in 2009 due to the ACC’s “reinterpretation” of the legislation. Also of concern is the manner in which the Sensitive Claims pathway often fails survivors of childhood sexual abuse.
Detailed in the report is the massive decrease from 40% of claims accepted versus claims lodged in 2009; down to 4% in 2011 and 2012. “This is a horrifying number.” says MacDonald. “This is clear evidence that the ACC’s policies are still failing New Zealanders and survivors of sexual abuse. And it’s worth remembering this report pre-dates the Privacy Breach of over 6000 ACC claimants, and subsequent events.”

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1207/S00197/acc-sensitive-claims-monitoring-report-a-fail-mark.htm

ACC rehabilitation plan announced

A press release from the Green Party by Kevin Hague

The Green Party has developed a rehabilitation plan to bring ACC back on track, Green Party health spokesperson Kevin Hague said today.
The step-by-step plan released today sets out the key action points that will bring about the culture change required at ACC. It includes reviewing the legislation and recent activities of ACC, but would also put in some systemic changes such as further security on sensitive claims information, retraining of front line staff, and bringing medical information back to a high level of priority in decision making.
“ACC needs to return to its original purpose: to provide a world class public service and honour the social contract it was founded on,” said Mr Hague.
“There are clear steps that need to be followed to get back on track; I’ve pulled together the key activities for the next 100 days.
“This rehabilitation plan prioritises the needs of the people making claims, as they should be at the heart of ACC’s work.
"Ms Rebstock, or any other chair who is appointed, is welcome to follow my plan to shape her work for the next few months.
“This plan sets out how to shift from a profit driven insurance model back to one that provides the level of care that injured and vulnerable New Zealanders need and should expect from now on.
“ACC is a great institution that has a proud history and still has some very good people working in it. It has, however, been on the wrong path.
“The Minister for ACC needs to seize this opportunity to return ACC to its founding principles and a culture of excellent public service; ready to work for New Zealanders,” said Mr Hague.

Additional information:
The Green Party ACC rehab plan

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1206/S00223/acc-rehabilitation-plan-announced.htm

Government to overhaul Privacy Act

A press release from the Government by Judith Collins

Justice Minister Judith Collins today announced the Government will repeal and re-enact the Privacy Act 1993 following its review by the Law Commission. The Commission’s recent report Review of the Privacy Act 1993 made over 100 recommendations for reform and the Government will consider those recommendations as part of its wider reform of privacy.
“Our current privacy law has been in place for almost 20 years and predates the creation of the internet. Huge changes to technology and information flows have occurred during that time and they have overtaken our privacy laws,” Ms Collins said.
Personal information is private and should not be divulged unnecessarily. However, people now expect more information to be available more quickly and, as social media has shown, are more likely to share what used to be considered ‘private information’.
“The foundations of the Act are sound, but it needs to be updated to reflect our changing attitudes and the way people, business and government use information in the 21st century,” Ms Collins said.
“We have already acted to address the immediate need for better information sharing for public service delivery through the Privacy (Information Sharing) Bill which is expected to be passed later this year.
“It’s important we ensure that the Act is fit for purpose for the individuals, agencies and businesses who are guided by it.
“I welcome the Law Commission’s extensive report and thank the Commission for their comprehensive work,” Ms Collins said.
Further announcements regarding specific policy proposals will be made later this year.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1203/S00346/government-to-overhaul-privacy-act.htm

Call for inquiry into ACC

A press release by the ACC Futures Coalition

The avalanche of rejected ACC claims for surgery currently being publiciised by the NZ Herald should trigger an independent inquiry into ACC, according to the ACC Futures Coalition.
“The internal review announced today in Parliament by the Minister is not good enough”, said Hazel Armstrong spokesperson for the ACC Futures Coalition. “Indeed the fact that he has had to give ACC instructions to fairly meet its legislative obligations is an admission that ACC has lost its direction.
“We are daily seeing a litany of poor decisions by ACC using degeneration and pre-existing conditions as a rationale to refuse legitimate claims for surgery,” said Hazel Armstrong. “Hundreds of New Zealanders who have paid their levies are being denied reasonable entitlements under the scheme.
“This is part of the same picture that we have seen developing since the beginning of last year. The government began with a manufactured crisis in ACC’s finances and have used this as a justification to deliberately and consistently undermine the scheme.
“We have seen the victims of sexual abuse put through ridiculous and stressful hoops in order to have access to counselling under the scheme. We have seen legislative change that has severely curtailed entitlements. We have seen the exclusion of those with less than 6% work-related hearing loss excluded from coverage and recent hearing regulations transfer the cost of hearing needs assessment, fitting and hearing devices onto the health system and individuals. We have seen an increase of people being pushed off ACC compensation onto sickness and invalids benefits and now there is a growing group of ordinary New Zealanders being denied surgery for injuries that most sensible people would see as being appropriately covered by ACC,” said Ms. Armstrong.
“There is a pattern here and that pattern is about discrediting our world-class ACC scheme so that it can be set up for radical change, probably involving full or partial privatisation,” said Ms Armstrong. “ACC is utilising private sector insurance techniques which are impacting negatively on legitimate claimants. The last thing we need is more private sector involvement.
“When the government finally undertook a review of ACC’s processes in the area of sensitive claims it revealed problems with ACC’s approach and a rethinking of how the claims of sexual abuse victims were being managed,” said Ms. Armstrong. “With this latest list of problems it is clear that we need a comprehensive and independent inquiry into how ACC is performing against the principles on which it was established and how it can be restored to meet those principles again.
“We call on the government or the Transport and Industrial Relations Select Committee to establish such an inquiry as soon as possible,” Ms Armstrong said.
The ACC Futures Coalition consists of community groups, academics, organisations representing people who need support from ACC, health treatment providers and unions who have come together around the following aim: To build cross-party support for retaining the status of ACC as a publicly-owned single provider committed to the ‘Woodhouse Principles’, with a view to maintaining and improving the provision of injury prevention, treatment, rehabilitation and ‘no fault’ compensation social insurance system for all New Zealanders.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1012/S00181/call-for-inquiry-into-acc.htm

ACC's culture must change

A press release by Access Support Services

Over the last year there have been numerous negative media reports about the way ACC is managing claims, especially concerning sexual abuse victims and decisions declining surgery funding. Many organisations, including medical practitioners, counsellors and lawyers, have expressed the same concerns raised by Access Support Services over the last year.
The changes to ACC have come as a result of the Government’s directive for it to reduce costs. ACC claim these changes reflect a more rigorous application of the ACC legislation than in the past and the culture of ACC had to change.
It is difficult to argue against this if you accept what ACC claim at face value. However, it does stack up when you consider the statistics. For example, the number of review applications challenging ACC’s decisions have increased from about 6000 in 2008 to 9000 last year, a 50% increase. If, as ACC claim, it is applying the legislation more rigorously then one would expect an increase in the number of decisions upheld at review when in fact it has remained constant at 75% over the past 10 years. That means 1 in 4 decisions challenged through the review process are found to be wrong.
Access Support Services own success at overturning decisions is somewhat greater, an average of 75%, which is comparable with what other ACC specialists report. But in the area of decisions relating to surgery and sensitive claims Access Support Services success is somewhat greater than its average.
“In the last year about 90% of the surgery funding decisions we have handled have been overturned and I can only recall one review decision relating to a sensitive claim not being successful since 2006” claims David Wadsworth, Head of Access Support Services.
This does not necessarily reflect our expertise in these areas, although these have made up a significant proportion of our cases in the last year, it is more indicative of the way ACC goes about its decision-making process. Access Support Services finds ACC relies too heavily on its internal medical advisors without giving proper consideration to all the circumstances, including external medical specialist opinions and the requirements of the legislation.
“We consider ACC’s decision making process is fundamentally flawed and it does not meet basic legal principles” says Mr Wadsworth.
In fact, one ACC Appeal Judge has expressed his concerns as well. In a recent District Court decision Judge Beattie commented; “ I am not impressed by the nature of the evidence upon which the respondent acted to make its decision, and that advice was given, I find, without proper regard to the legal position of the appellant's entitlement to funding for treatment.”
In another appeal decision concerning ACC’s decision to decline funding surgery Judge Beattie commented; “This Court has now heard and considered a significant number of cases on appeal where the respondent's decision to decline to fund surgery is based essentially on the fact that the claimant's shoulder is displaying aspects of degeneration commensurate with age. The respondent is very quick to seize on that identified state of affairs and use it as a reason for declinature, and I find that the present case is such an example of that.”
Access Support Services considers the changes to ACC are less about rigorous application of the legislation and more to do with an arbitrary approach to decision-making. “ACC must change its culture or its ACC’s senior management, or both. This is not what the ACC scheme is suppose to be about and it is contrary the requirements of the legislation,” says Mr Wadsworth.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1012/S00126/accs-culture-must-change-advocate.htm

And now for the apology...?

A blog entry from Off The Couch by Kyle McDonald

I may be old fashioned, or conditioned by my profession to focus on “the relationship” but perhaps it’s now time for ACC to apologise.
In these times of “systemic failure,” independent reviews and Ministers who are unable (or unwilling) to take a position, there is still a lot to be said for a good old fashioned “sorry.” So what have ACC got to be sorry for?

Click here to read more.

ACC responds to independent review of services

A press release from ACC

Last year’s changes to how ACC manages sexual abuse claims were designed to achieve two goals. They were to ensure we targeted our services to those people who were actually covered by our legislation and to improve the outcomes those people achieved. We still believe those are reasonable goals.
The changes were never about saving money. Year on year, our total expenditure in this area has hardly fallen and it is only a tiny part of ACC’s total expenditure.
However, it became clear that the changes we had introduced had excluded more people than we expected and, more importantly, there was little else available for them outside of ACC.
“ACC has already acknowledged this situation itself and had begun working with the sector to put in place whatever support we appropriately can. For example, we recently introduced up to 16 hours of support for people with a new sensitive claim, or who are awaiting an assessment”, said Denise Cosgrove, General Manager, Claims Management, ACC.
The report of the Independent Review Panel, released today by the Minister for ACC, raises a number of serious issues and ACC has already begun responding to them.
“ACC met with the Panel to discuss its findings. We agree that action is required in some areas, and believe the initiatives we have already put in place will go some way to addressing their concerns.”
“However, we continue to believe that, for those who are accepted by ACC, the current Pathway offers considerable advantages over the previous process. It ensures people get a proper assessment before treatment is undertaken, that there is a plan in place for that treatment and checks that progress is being made towards set objectives. This represents sound clinical practice.”
“Nonetheless, to ensure we make good decisions moving forward, we have begun regular meetings with the sexual abuse treatment sector, including clients, to make sure that they are involved and their voices are heard. The feedback we have received from them and the Independent Panel about our early work has been very positive”.
Ms Cosgrove said work was continuing on the development of separate processes for children and other groups such as Maori. A workforce development plan for counsellors, to ensure they provided a high-quality service, was also being developed. “But I have to emphasise that not all of the answers sit with ACC. We are just one of a number of agencies with responsibilities in this area. The Government’s response to the Report of the Sexual Violence Taskforce will provide a ‘whole of government’ approach, which is a sensible way to ensure that the right solutions are put in place”.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1009/S00101/acc-responds-to-independent-review-of-services.htm

ACC has buckled to the crowd

A letter to the editor of the Dominion Post by Gordon Waugh

ACC has shamefully surrendered to the rants of a petulant sex-abuse industry and backed down over changes to the way claims are handled.
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.

© 2010 Fairfax New Zealand Ltd
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/4049555/Letter-ACC-has-buckled-to-the-crowd

National still failing to take responsibility

A press release from the Labour Party

The Minister of ACC Nick Smith is trying to avoid taking proper responsibility for the plainly unjust cuts in ACC funded counselling for victims of sexual crimes, Labour’s ACC spokesman David Parker and Victims Rights spokesperson Lynne Pillay say.
“The Minister was repeatedly and clearly warned, by clinicians and the Labour Party that his changes were so obviously wrong,” David Parker said. “The Minister’s attempt to blame this all on the ACC Board should not be accepted. Why have a Minister if he will not take responsibility in the face of prior warnings?
“In some months the number of people being approved for counselling following sexual crimes has been 90 percent lower than previously. The Minister tried to defend this.
“The latest justification asserts that a change to the law is needed, this excuse is another example of slippery behaviour. No one has shown that providing counselling to victims of sexual crimes is illegal. If it was, then ACC had been acting illegally for years, and the latest reinstatement of counselling would itself be illegal if that argument were accurate.
“Similarly, the Minister’s attempt to blame the prior government doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. It was the current government that introduced the requirement to prove mental illness rather than mental injury.
“This cannot be blamed on either the prior government or the Massey University guidelines. In fact the current government’s misuse of those guidelines lead to Massey publicly disassociating from ACC’s changes to their guidelines.
“The public record on this is clear for all to see the Minister and his hand picked Board are responsible, and should accept accountability.
Victims Rights spokesperson Lynne Pillay said the changes that had been introduced by National had been a disaster.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1008/S00195/national-still-failing-to-take-responsibility.htm

ACC matters - cautiously optimistic!

An article from ANZASW NoticeBoard by Cathy McPherson

On May 7 I attended a hui in Wellington, requested by the Sensitive Claims Advisory Group at our last meeting in March, when ACC admitted that they need some assistance to fill in the “gaps” in service left by their new Pathways. The meeting was faciltated by Graham Bashford. While Peter Jansen was in attendance, he had no role to play in the meeting, and in fact appeared extremely subdued... SCAG members were not entirely sure what to make of this development. Approximately 60 attended the meeting.
The week before the meeting, there was an announcement by the Minister of Justice that the Minister of Social Development would be undertaking a “stocktake of Government spending on specialised sexual violence services. The terms of reference are expected to be finalised soon, and she expects to report back by the end of the year. The aim of the stocktake is to build on TOAH NNEST’s work, establish what the Government is already purchasing, what the current and long term demands for services will be, identifying opportunities for efficiency and effectiveness and considering future funding options”.
As a consequence of this announcement, we were informed the day before the meeting by ACC that “the agenda for the ACC facilitated workshop would include the time to develop a statement from the group to provide to the Minister.”

Impressions of SCU Workshop:
The workshop was attended by approximately 60 people including SCAG, representatives of Police, child and adolescent and adult mental health, representative of Commissioner for Children, Massey University and ACC including James du Plessis and David Rankin, and Denise Cosgrove, the new General Manager of Claims Management, as well as some claims managers.
ACC was actually asking and listening as to how to fill the gaps left by the new Pathways.
They made a clear statement that they recognized there were clear gaps in the system, and that ACC were committed to doing everything they could to address these “within the constraints of the legislation”. Furthermore, they stated they would record and forward the gaps highlighted by us to the review panel.
Graham Bashford went on to outline the history of the changes and the current situation of which the most salient point was a recognition of clear delays, namely that they have approved claims within three days when all the information has been present, but that the current average is 47 days. (This was challenged by SCAG as we have it well-documented that clients have been waiting for decisions from last year).
It was also acknowledged that the approval rate is very low. It appears that ACC see a clear difference between their legislative responsibility and clinical responsibility, as the phrase “within the constraints of the legislation” kept coming up.
Concern was expressed that a great number of ACC counsellors have either left the profession or have taken on new positions because of the almost zero approval rate by ACC.
ACC for the first time stated that over the years, ACC had become the default provider of counselling services for sexual abuse survivors even when mental health, difficulties prior to the sexual abuse, prior alcohol and drug issues etc were in existence. One of the suggestions at my discussion table (which included Kim McGregor, David Rankin, James Du Plessis, Commisioner for Children rep, Police rep, DSAC rep) and the suggestion was from the ACC people that funding for counselling have contributions from Health and Ministry of Social Development.
Police expressed concern about how much more difficult it is to obtain a prosecution when complainant is not adequately supported through that process and may be legally discredited due to mental health diagnosis.
It was acknowledged by those present that the present system was clinically unsafe and that the present process was not working either for ACC or for clients.

Some of the suggestions from the meeting:
Clear call for long term goal to be implemented of TOAH NNEST framework; namely a multi-ministry and cross agency response that is seamless and well funded and can respond quickly to the acute situation of disclosure.
Also a clear indication that some sort of short-term emergency response needs to be implemented immediately to stop the decline. Various ideas were tabled, including going back to four sessions for all new claims to hold clients until a decision is made by ACC re approval of claim.
Finding culturally safe ways of working within the Pathways.

ACC made the following commitments:
To document and discuss suggestions at next SCAG - I will report back on this after the June 19 meeting.
To inform both the CEO of ACC and the Minister of the outcomes and content of this meeting as a matter of urgency.
To record our concerns and suggestions unedited and as discussed.
To pass on outcomes of the meeting to the review.

At the end of the day, SCAG members came away feeling cautiously optimistic and hoping this was not just window-dressing. We were quite impressed with Denise Cosgrove but only time will tell. We certainly came away believing that our concerns have been listened to, and look forward to the departure of Graham Bashford, and hopefully Peter Jansen as well.
Also the Review Committee has just been announced for the promised six month review of the Pathways. There will be an opportunity for us all to make submissions to this Committee. I am trying to get an address to send submissions to and will publicise this as soon as I have it.

http://anzasw.org.nz/sw-in-nz/publications/

Questions for written answer

9554 (2010). Lynne Pillay to the Minister for ACC: What, if any, papers has the Minister taken to Cabinet, relating to sensitive claims and or ACC’s Sensitive Claims Unit since 1 January 2010, by date and title?
Hon Dr Nick Smith (Minister for ACC) replied: I have taken no papers to Cabinet relating to sensitive claims or ACC Sensitive Claims Unit since I became Minister. The changes to the management of sensitive claims have been made entirely by ACC, involving medical practitioners based on the guidelines produced by Massey University and launched by Hon Steve Maharey in March 2008. The only decision I have made is to initiate an independent clinical review.
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/9/0/e/QWA_09554_2010-9554-2010-Lynne-Pillay-to-the-Minister-for-ACC.htm

9589 (2010). Lynne Pillay to the Minister for ACC: What sensitive claims, since 1 November 2009, are now pending with ACC that involve counselling for sex abuse victims and/or victims of domestic violence in Wairarapa, if any?
Hon Dr Nick Smith (Minister for ACC) replied: I refer the member to the answer to Parliamentary Written Question 09590 (2010).
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/4/3/9/QWA_09589_2010-9589-2010-Lynne-Pillay-to-the-Minister-for-ACC.htm

9590 (2010). Lynne Pillay to the Minister for ACC: How many sensitive claims, if any, have been declined by ACC that involve counselling for sex abuse victims and/or victims of domestic violence in Wairarapa since 1 November 2009?
Hon Dr Nick Smith (Minister for ACC) replied: Claims, commonly known as ‘sensitive claims’, receive cover under the ACC scheme when there is a significant mental injury as a result of certain criminal acts, dealt with in the Crimes Act 1961. Section 21 of the Accident Compensation Act details the cover provisions for such claims. The twenty specific criminal acts covered by ACC are stipulated within Schedule 3 to the Accident Compensation Act. ACC does not keep specific data on claim numbers for counselling accepted, declined or pending. Data is kept on claim numbers of which counselling may be one of the treatment options.
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/0/b/6/QWA_09590_2010-9590-2010-Lynne-Pillay-to-the-Minister-for-ACC.htm

9591 (2010). Lynne Pillay to the Minister for ACC: What sensitive claims, if any, are now pending with ACC that involve counselling for sex abuse victims and/or victims of domestic violence in Wairarapa?
Hon Dr Nick Smith (Minister for ACC) replied: I refer the member to the answer to Parliamentary Written Question 09590 (2010).
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/0/7/b/QWA_09591_2010-9591-2010-Lynne-Pillay-to-the-Minister-for-ACC.htm

Questions for written answer

18921 (2009). Hon David Parker to the Minister for ACC: Are the latest projections based on earlier trends for numbers of ACC funded sensitive claims prior to 2009?
Hon Dr Nick Smith (Minister for ACC) replied: The most recent claims liability projections were based on data and information through 30 June 2009. They were derived from patterns and trends of claim numbers based on the historical experience, giving more weight to the recent periods. Knowledge of operational and other changes were also taken into consideration; however, these often receive less weighting until evidence of the impacts can be demonstrated. These projections are currently being updated using data and information up to 31 December 2009. Mental injury has always been a requirement, defined under the legislation, in order for ACC to accept cover for a sensitive claim. The Corporation has put in place new guidelines implementing best practice for managing clients with a mental injury. This process began in 2008 with the publication of the Massey University Guidelines, for the assessment and treatment of people who experience mental injury as a result of sexual assault or sexual abuse.
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/2/8/3/QWA_18921_2009-18921-2009-Hon-David-Parker-to-the-Minister-for-ACC.htm

18923 (2009). Hon David Parker to the Minister for ACC: What are the current rates and number of declines and accepted and pending for ACC funded sensitive claims by region?
Hon Dr Nick Smith (Minister for ACC) replied: I refer the Member to the attached table which provides details of the number of sensitive claims lodged between 1 July and 30 November 2009, by region. This information is broken down by the current number and percentage that have been accepted, declined or are pending.
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/a/9/a/QWA_18923_2009-18923-2009-Hon-David-Parker-to-the-Minister-for-ACC.htm

18925 (2009). Hon David Parker to the Minister for ACC: Are the current rates of accepted ACC funded sensitive claims by region less in November 2009 than in November 2008?
Hon Dr Nick Smith (Minister for ACC) replied: I am unable to respond to the Member’s request, as not enough time has lapsed for ACC to provide meaningful figures for the number of Sensitive Claims accepted in November 2009.
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/a/e/c/QWA_18925_2009-18925-2009-Hon-David-Parker-to-the-Minister-for-ACC.htm

Question for written answer

17387 (2009). Hon David Parker to the Minister for ACC: Going region by region, how many sensitive claims did ACC approve for August, September and October 2009?
Hon Dr Nick Smith (Minister for ACC) replied: In order for a sensitive claim to receive cover under the ACC Scheme, there must be a significant mental injury as a result of certain criminal acts, dealt with in the Crimes Act 1961. Section 21 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act 2001 details the cover provisions for sensitive claims. I refer the Member to the attached table which provides details, region by region, of the number of sensitive claims that were accepted for cover by ACC for the months of August, September and October 2009.
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/8/e/2/QWA_17387_2009-17387-2009-Hon-David-Parker-to-the-Minister-for-ACC.htm

ACC should continue funding of sexual abuse help-line

Press release from Access Support Services

It has been reported ACC intends discontinuing its funding for the Auckland sexual abuse help-line. The reason ACC has given is that it is outside its legislative responsibility.
Access Support Services considers ACC has a clear responsibility to fund such initiatives. One of the expressed purposes of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act 2001 is “establishing as a primary function of the Corporation the promotion of measures to reduce the incidence and severity of personal injury” (ref: Section 3 of the IPRCA 2001).
Personal injury caused by sexual abuse are some of the most complex and difficult treat injury claims Access Support Services deals with and usually comes at a significant cost to ACC by way of administration and providing entitlements, such as lump sum compensation, treatment and weekly compensation. “ACC should be doing more in this area, not less,” says Mr Wadsworth, Principal of Access Support Services.
“It is extremely disappointing the people at ACC’s Corporate Head Office cannot see the woods for the trees,” Mr Wadsworth said. “I will be looking into this matter further. In the meantime, we call upon Dr Smith and the ACC Board to take the necessary action to ensure ACC is meeting its responsibilities under the legislation.”

http://www.accesssupport.co.nz/press-release-27may09.html