When I worked in child protection, I often came across the word ‘vexatious’. Usually used to describe frivolous lawsuits, it appeared time and again about children. The context? They all disclosed sexual abuse, but were never believed.
Rather than approach their responsibilities from a position of care, professionals instead became distrusting and accusatory. From a position of privilege, it was too easy to make casual judgements.
“Why is she only saying something now?”
“It’s funny he’s picked this time to say something, when he’s just got in trouble at school.”
“If it really happened, why didn’t they say something when we first saw them?”
Research tells us that false allegations of child sexual abuse are rare, ranging between 2-5% of cases. The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse found that a quarter of survivors they spoke to, who disclosed abuse in childhood, feared that they would not be believed. We are far more willing to accept truth in the abstract than when it is personalised. We actively encourage victims/survivors to come forward, but then fundamentally break down their disclosure on an individual basis when they do.That distinction is part of the reason why victims find it so difficult to come forward.
So when I was asked what I thought about Peter Gutwein’s disclosure that he was abused, I didn’t hesitate in saying I believed him. Belief is a critical step when faced with a disclosure of abuse, and I wasn’t about to let politics get in the way of that principle. I dismissed the issue some people had about the timing of the announcement; victim/survivors should be able to disclose when they need to, not at a time convenient to us.
What bothered me about the Premier’s statement though, was the lack of acknowledgement about the privilege of his position compared to many other victim/survivors. This lack of acknowledgement could compromise trust in the government, and worse still the Commission of Inquiry.
Peter Gutwein said that he would only talk about his abuse once. As a victim/survivor this is his right and should be in his power. However, for many victims, especially children, this is not a power they enjoy.
When a child discloses abuse they will have to disclose to multiple people, on multiple occasions. Disclosures can be re-traumatising, and are not always intentional.
A child might initially disclose to a family member, or a professional like a teacher.
If reported, statutory child protection workers may speak to the child, possibly trying to gain clarity about the disclosure.
Police may interview the child for criminal investigation..
A medical examination might be required, precipitating conversation with health staff.
Referrals may be made to therapists, counsellors and other supports (often more than one), necessitating further conversations. This also discounts conversations with family, friends or peers.
Each conversation is a potential reliving of the trauma, and children are rarely prepared for the intensity of scrutiny that follows disclosure. No child gets to say ‘I’m only going to talk about this once.’
Peter Gutwein said that he fought off his attacker. The Royal Commission found over 20% of survivors they spoke to had not disclosed as a child for fear of retribution, and 1 in 20 had been threatened by the perpetrator. Given the violence that many victims suffer, this was a brave act by the Premier. However, I gather he was 16 years old at the time. What would his physical ability be if he were 10 years younger? Most victims are not able to physically stop their abuse.
What troubled me most though, was when, in response to accusations that he lacked empathy, the Premier said that he had walked in the shoes of other victim/survivors. It made a false equivalence.
Yes, he has experienced abuse, but it’s a delicate matter to take on the mantle of other people’s particular experiences when you have not been subjected to them. People experience abuse in different ways.
Worse still, at time of writing, two of his ministers have yet to admit that they groaned in Parliament when faced with a question from a victim/survivor, with no indication that they will be publicly forced to apologise. It’s difficult to maintain a sense of empathy when running defence for the opposite behaviour.
I don’t mean to sound universally critical of the Premier; it took courage to disclose his abuse. What I am saying though, is that those in positions of power, even if they are victim/survivors, need to recognise the level of privilege that they might have, and consider how most victims/survivors, even right now, are actively prohibited from disclosing their abuse and getting help. If the Commission of Inquiry is to fulfil its function and potential, then we need greater acknowledgement, leadership and sincerity from the very top, or the whole thing will go to waste.
Jack Davenport is a social worker with over 10 years experience in child protection. He works as a Policy Advisor for Greens Senator Peter Whish-Wilson, but is writing in a personal capacity.
