1. “They did not believe me” Responding to Child Sexual Abuse by Church Personnel in Australia Dr Jodi Death School of Justice, Queensland University of Technology Crime and Justice Research Centre http://www.cjrc.qut.edu.au/

2. The Context  International issue  Sustained waves of disclosure 1980’s, 1990’s, 2000’s  Continued Civil and Criminal prosecution  Call for a Royal Commission in Australia into child abuse in Religious Institutions  Sustained lobbying by survivors and the Greens (Political Party)  Parliamentary Inquiry in Victoria concluded – report forthcoming  Royal Commission announced 12 November 2012

3. This Study  Seeking to hear directly from Australian survivors about their perspectives including:  Age of onset  Nature of Abuse  Duration  Disclosure  To whom  When  Response  Outcomes  Online survey  81 respondents  49% male 51% female  Qualitative Interviews  15 Participants

4. Denomination  65%* (n = 39) Roman Catholic  13% (n=8) Anglican  22% (n=10) Other  *NB: Applies to single abuser only  73% (n=61) single abuser only  27% (n=20) multiple abuser (up to 4)

5. Age Onset of Abuse

6. Year of Onset

7. Duration of abuse

8. Frequency of Abuse

9. Nature of Abuse – penetrative acts (n=59)

10. Nature of Abuse – other acts (n=59)

12. Disclosure – at time of abuse  At the time the abuse was occurring 58% (n=33) participants believed someone else knew the abuse was occurring. Why?

13. Why did you believe someone else knew - other  “Incidents took place in his bedroom in monestary with others knowing I was alone with him with the door shut. They never spoke to me “  “Brother was removed to another school”  “they witnessed and masturbated while they watched “  “One adult witnessed it, another was told about it by several parents”  “ because the priest (abuser) told them”  “I quite obviously hated him, and would avoid him at our house “

14. Family Context of Disclosure  “My parents were grieving for a man who had sexually abused 3 of their children. To the day he died and 3 days later they still believed in him and trusted him with all their being. They had welcomed him into our home as a Christian Brother, a teacher/tutor and befriended him personally only to have it thrown in their faces. I was disgusted and angry to see them so upset and to hear that my father had confirmed he would carry his coffin. I was so angry, I could not keep quiet any longer, he was dead and I was an adult, I had to say something, I wasn’t going to let him betray my father and keep me silenced from the grave.”

15. Cost of silence  “Yeah - this person died not long after the abuse stopped - a couple of years - I felt responsible and guilty and was unravelling in my life as a wife and a mother - my own daughter got into an abusive relationship at a very young age and became pregnant and had a child at 16 - I knew during this time that I had my own work to do here as the cost of not doing it was too great for myself and for my offspring”

16. Official Reporting  70% (n=44) had reported their abuse officially

17. Strongest reasons for reporting: 1.The protection of children 2.The Church to accept responsibility for the abuse 3.The individual to accept responsibility for the abuse 4.My story to be heard by the Church 5.The individual to be removed from their position 6.Counseling for myself 7.Church investigation 8.Police Investigation 9.Criminal conviction 10.Counseling for myself

23. Official outcomes  Moved to another state (n=7)  Removed from duties (n=11)  Status unchanged  Defrocked (n=5)  Deceased (n=9)  Suicide (n=1)  Criminal Justice Responses (n=24)  Police investigation  Prosecution  Conviction  No conviction

24. Overall…  The story is not all bad  Participants do report re-victimisation and re- traumatisation through reporting processes within Churches  Participants more satisfied with Police responses, regardless of outcome, than Church responses

25. Thank you Questions?  email: jodi.death@qut.edu.aujodi.death@qut.edu.au