Skip to main content Skip to navigation within this section
Abuse in Care - Royal Commission of Inquiry

Abuse in Care - Royal Commission of Inquiry

This Royal Commission is an independent inquiry into abuse in state care and in the care of faith-based institutions in Aotearoa New Zealand.

  • Reports Ngā pūrongo
    • Whanaketia
    • Stolen Lives, Marked Souls
    • Beautiful Children: Inquiry into the Lake Alice Child and Adolescent Unit
    • He Purapura Ora, he Māra Tipu from Redress to Puretumu Torowhānui
    • Tāwharautia: Interim Report
    • Administrative Report
  • Survivors Ngā purapura ora
    • Survivor experiences
    • Survivor videos
    • Getting help and support
  • Research and engagement Rangahau me ngā tūhonhono
    • How people engaged with the Inquiry
    • Public hearings
    • Research
    • Evidence library
  • Background material Ngā raupapa tuara
    • About the Royal Commission
    • Inquiry team
    • Advisory groups and reference groups
    • Quarterly reports
    • Timeline
    • Questions and answers
    • Pānui
    • News
  • Document library Kohinga tuhinga
    • Document library
    • Case studies
    • Recommendations
    • Summaries and guides
Quick Exit
AdobeStock 101472581
  • Home
  • Reports
  • He Purapura Ora, he Māra Tipu from Redress to Puretumu Torowhānui
  • Lack of manaakitanga through stressful process
Listen

Lack of manaakitanga through stressful process

Most survivors found it an emotional, even traumatic, experience to make a claim for redress because of the painful memories and feelings of disempowerment it brought back. Some described feeling suicidal during and after the redress process. Very few said they received adequate support through this challenging experience. For them, redress processes seemed designed almost to add to the strain they were under as they were asked again and again, often in an intrusive way by investigators and assessors, to describe the abuse they suffered.

More generally, survivors felt the institutions lacked any genuine concern for them or interest in finding out what might help them repair their lives. Rather, the institutions’ sole concern was reaching a settlement and putting the matter behind them. Jacinda Thompson said the Anglican Church offered her no counselling, and eventually she asked for it herself, by which time, she learned, the church had already provided counselling for her abuser. Joan Bellingham said she never received any support from the Ministry of Health throughout her claim, and she “constantly felt like I was battling uphill to get people to recognise me or believe what I was saying actually happened”. Robert Oakly said the Anglican Church’s initial response to his contact “didn’t accept responsibility for me and there was no further offer of support other than to pray for me. I’m a non-believer because of what they’ve done, so praying is not going to do anything”. Kathleen O’Connor said the Ministry of Social Development provided no support, and made no contact with her, during the claims process. She said six months passed and she heard nothing, which she said made her “really angry because when I first had the interview, I did feel like I was being heard and treated like a person [but] now I feel like I am just another number on the files”.

Some survivors of abuse while in Salvation Army care wanted support to continue after receiving their settlement, but this did not happen. One survivor, Mr N, said he found the whole process “a bit clinical”. At the time he made his statement to the inquiry, he had had no contact from The Salvation Army since receiving a payment. Another, Mr L, said he, too, never heard from The Salvation Army after the redress process was over and it felt like “their attitude was, ‘eh, we’ve done our bit, we’ve dealt with this fella’”.

If redress processes did provide support, it was usually limited to counselling. Some survivors found counselling an effective way to help with trauma. Not all survivors wanted counselling, especially if it was offered through a Pākehā or Palagi lens. Hone Tipene said he “will not engage with counsellors because they have nothing they can connect with me on”.

Some Māori survivors wanted support to connect or reconnect with whānau and heal in ways that reflected their cultural values. Neta Kerepeti spoke of the therapeutic value of spending time with relatives on her marae. In her view, a wider range of therapeutic services should be eligible for funding.

 

Next: Advocacy and financial help hit and miss

1-1-introduction-10
  • 2.5: Survivors’ experiences of State and faith redress processes
  • Māori faces and tikanga values nowhere to be seen
  • Pacific survivors’ culture overlooked
  • Redress unobtainable for most Deaf and disabled people
  • Survivors feel without a voice in way redress processes work
  • Survivors feel left in the dark by inadequate information and contact
  • Lack of manaakitanga through stressful process
  • Advocacy and financial help hit and miss
  • Lack of independence or independent review
  • Frustration at lack of accountability
  • Failure to take preventive action and make system change
  • Long delays a cause of frustration
  • Apologies not meaningful
  • Financial payments are inadequate
  • Redress was inadequate to restore mana or oranga
  • No ability to respond to harm to whānau
  • Survivors felt powerless
  • Redress processes have caused further harm
Site Logo Light
Connect with us
  • Find us on Facebook


    • Legal Menu
      • Privacy policy
      • Terms
      • Accessibility
      • Contact us
    • Ngā pūrongo Reports
      • Whanaketia
      • Stolen Lives, Marked Souls
      • Beautiful Children
      • He Purapura Ora, he Māra Tipu
      • Tāwharautia: Pūrongo o te Wā
      • Administrative report
    • Ngā purapura ora Survivors
      • Getting help and support
      • Questions and answers
      • Survivor stories
    • Rangahau me ngā tūhonhono Research and engagement
      • How people engaged with the Inquiry
      • Public hearings
      • Research
    • Te tuara me tōna raupapa Background and material
      • About the Royal Commission
      • Inquiry team
      • Advisory Groups and Reference Groups
      • Quarterly reports
      • Timeline
      • Pānui
    • Kohinga tuhinga Document library
      • Document Library
      • Case studies
      • Recommendations
      • Summaries and guides

    © 2025 Abuse in Care - Royal Commission of Inquiry