National Redress Scheme

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The National Redress Scheme (NRS) was established in 2018 by the Australian Government as a result of a recommendation by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. It aims to offer support to survivors of abuse suffered at various institutions.[1] Providing the abuse occurred at an institution that has opted into the scheme, survivors may apply to receive monetary compensation and/or psychological counselling. [2] According to an ABC report, some 60,000 survivors might be eligible.[3]

Procedure and compensation

Survivors of child sexual abuse are invited to call NRS to request an application form be mailed to their nominated address or they can create a myGov account to complete the form on-line. The applicant is required to fill-in details of the assault, the assailant(s), and the institution(s).[4] A further one-and-a-half-page space is allotted to “describe the impact of sexual abuse across your life”. [5] The process does not involve face-to-face assessment meetings. Victims of child sexual abuse who are currently in jail are not eligible to apply. [6] Before the NRS was established, it was estimated that 60,000 survivors would seek payout.[3]

According to the NRS website, payments range between less than $10,000 to $150,000, and earlier payments related to abuse are deducted from that sum.[7] Applicants may be eligible for free counselling. [8]

Participating institutions

In order for an applicant to receive compensation for abuse that happened while they were at an institution, that institution must have opted to join the NRS. Applicants are able to search for participating institutions on the NRS website. [9]

By late February, 2019, many institutions had still not joined the scheme. In response, the Department of Social Services released a list of 100 institutions that had not signed up. [10] [11]

Catholic Church participation

The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference (ACBC) formed a company called Australian Catholic Redress Limited (ACRL) in 2018. This was done on behalf of the 35 Archdioceses, Dioceses, Eparchies and Ordinariates that covers the vast proportion of Australian Catholics. The ACRL joined the National Redress Scheme in 2018.

The ACBC also encouraged the various Institutes of Clerical Religious (Priests or Priests and Brothers) the Institutes of Religious Brothers, Institutes of Religious Women, Institutes of Consecrated Life, Societies of Apostolic Life, Associations of Christ’s Faithful, and the Ministerial Public Juridic Persons who are separate entities to ACRL to also join the National Redress Scheme. Those that had involvement with young people have generally joined the scheme.

Non Participating institutions

As of May, 2021, the government Commission lists these 8 institutions as declining to participate:[12]

  • Fairbridge Society
  • Gold Coast Family Support Group (now FSG Australia)
  • Hunter Aboriginal Children’s Services (HACS)
  • RG Dance Pty Ltd
  • Yeshiva Centre and the Yeshiva College Bondi – pre 2003
  • Yeshivah Centre Melbourne (Chabad Institutions of Victoria Ltd.)*
  • Mordialloc Sailing Club

Note: * indicates They have stated that they intend to participate at some time in the future.

Criticism

The NRS has attracted criticism from abuse survivors, survivor advocate groups, lawyers, representatives of the Anglican Church, and politicians. [13] Much of this criticism has focused on the assessment matrix used by the scheme to calculate compensation. Whereas the Royal Commission's recommended matrix was based on a 100 point system - 40 points for the abuse severity, 40 for impact, and 20 for institutional factors - to determine payments up to a maximum of $200 000, the Guardian reported that the maximum payout of $150,000 was only possible in extreme circumstances involving sexual abuse with penetration.[14]

For those survivors who suffered non-penetrative sexual abuse (which may include oral sex), the maximum payout under the scheme is $50 000, regardless of the number of times they were abused, the number of institutions in which they were abused, or the impact of the abuse. [15] Tasmania's Anglican Bishop, Richard Condie commented the way the assessment matrix is designed would limit payouts.[13] Lawyer, Judy Courtin also described the matrix unfair and not an evidence-based policy.[13] Courtin explained in a separate article that the matrix limits payouts for those who were not sexually penetrated to $50,000, even when in the presence of extenuating circumstances.[14] By comparison, Rebel Wilson was awarded $650,000 by the Victorian supreme court for "hurt and distress"[16] in a defamation case against magazine company Bauer Media.[17]

The ABC reported that details of the NRS matrix were not made public until after the bill had passed both houses of Parliament.[13] Bishop Condie said the Anglican Church tried unsuccessfully to get the Federal Government to make changes to the matrix.[13]

In The Sydney Morning Herald, survivor and barrister James Miller insisted for changes to the existing version of the matrix, which he claimed ran contrary to the Royal Commission recommendation for assessment to be calculated according to severity and impact.[18]

Response to criticism

The Catholic Church in Australia supported limiting maximum compensation to $150,000, which faced criticism from the legal profession. The Catholic Weekly responded, stating that although this is fair criticism towards the church, they would have followed through with $200,000 payouts if the government did as well, but they believe the government did not due to concerns about funding availability. In response to critics saying that the church only joined the scheme because it reduces their legal liability and is believed to be financially cheaper than having the church being sued for damages in court, the article claims that the burden of proof is also higher for litigation in court compared to the requirements of the NRS.[19]

References

  1. ^ "National Redress Scheme for people who have experienced institutional child sexual abuse | Department of Social Services, Australian Government". www.dss.gov.au.
  2. ^ "What can you apply for? | National Redress Scheme". www.nationalredress.gov.au.
  3. ^ a b McDonald, Philippa (October 20, 2018). "Terminally ill victims of child sexual abuse still waiting for redress payments". ABC News.
  4. ^ National Redress Scheme, Application for Redress form, Question 44
  5. ^ National Redress Scheme, Application for Redress form, Question 58
  6. ^ "Who can apply? | National Redress Scheme". www.nationalredress.gov.au.
  7. ^ "What can you apply for? | National Redress Scheme". www.nationalredress.gov.au.
  8. ^ "What can you apply for? | National Redress Scheme". www.nationalredress.gov.au.
  9. ^ "Search for institutions that have joined the Scheme | National Redress Scheme". www.nationalredress.gov.au.
  10. ^ "Institutions that have not yet joined the Scheme | National Redress Scheme". www.nationalredress.gov.au.
  11. ^ Macmillan, political reporter Jade (February 28, 2019). "Government names and shames institutions yet to sign up to child sexual abuse redress scheme". ABC News.
  12. ^ "Institutions named in the Royal Commission that have not yet joined the Scheme". National Redress Scheme.
  13. ^ a b c d e Ward, Airlie (September 16, 2018). "Anglican Church horrified over how redress scheme calculates payments to victims". ABC News.
  14. ^ a b Courtin, Judy; Atmore, Chris (September 2, 2018). "The national redress scheme for child sex abuse victims is unjust and damaging | Judy Courtin and Chris Atmore" – via www.theguardian.com.
  15. ^ "How the new Sexual Abuse Redress scheme is not working". Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers.
  16. ^ Meade, Amanda (June 14, 2018). "Rebel Wilson's $4.5m defamation damages slashed to $600,000" – via www.theguardian.com.
  17. ^ "Rebel Wilson's record defamation payout dramatically slashed on appeal". ABC News. June 14, 2018.
  18. ^ McCarthy, Joanne (October 10, 2018). "'Overly legalistic and insensitive': survivor urges national redress scheme reform". Newcastle Herald.
  19. ^ Doumit, Monica (June 6, 2018). "Criticise redress, fine. Lynch? No".