After a weekend’s consideration I have decided to compose and send this email to the two panel members who spoke to me following the listening meeting. I wasn’t sure who to address this to or who will end up seeing it. I intend to start with my impressions and comments on the meeting, which will obviously be relevant to the whole panel. I also intend to share a little of my personal circumstances which I hope will explain my interest in the enquiry – and may also help to put my impressions of the meeting into context.
Firstly I would like to make it clear that anything within this email are completely my personal opinions and impressions. I do not claim to be a professional on anything but my own perceptions and as such other survivors may hold differing views. Any ideas I may detail are suggestions only and also may not be relevant to all or any other survivors. We are all different. We have different political ideas, religious or non-religious beliefs, different personal boundaries, different fears and triggers. Different lives, different stories and different damage manifesting in different ways. I can only speak for me.
Pre-event communication
On the email received just before the event there were no times included. Myself and my support worker had to “Google” it to find out, and even then weren’t sure whether those times were accurate.
There could be some consideration of whether it would be helpful to provide a different email to survivors than to the professional representatives. Maybe a less formal and more structured email to survivors to put them at ease and to know what to expect on the day to lessen anxiety. Whilst I certainly don’t think that survivors may need things “dumbed down” anything that may relieve anxiety and fear of authority may be helpful to some. It may also be helpful to include a short list of questions for the survivor to consider or brainstorm before attending.
Event
Introductions
It was great to hear panel member’s experience, honesty and enthusiasm for the inquiry – It was also refreshing to hear an admittance that you are open to ideas and suggestions.
I personally found it a little intimidating that 90% of the other “survivors” appeared to have a very “set” agenda for attending. It appeared to me to be quite time consuming, and my impression was that it almost appeared to feel like a time for people to promote their charity/work/service and to almost jockey for recognition before the panel. At some point it felt to me almost like people felt that they had to prove their right to be there. This could leave some survivors feeling inadequate and that their contributions would not be as valid as those that make a career from it.
What else?
I think that in the panel’s introductions it should not be assumed that survivors are aware of the structure of the enquiry and the different job roles of each member and what that entails.
Also the set-up of the room could be looked into – with separate tables wherever I had been seated I would have had my back to someone. Given that many survivors have PTSD this could create anxiety for many. Maybe having a large table or group of tables for people to sit round would eliminate this and also create an atmosphere of unity and equality.
Helping the panel in it’s work. What was most/least helpful?
Most helpful was the impression given by the panel members that they were willing to listen and learn from the survivors and their experiences, that was well explained, with honesty and so was believable.
Least helpful was the lack of explanation of what the survivor’s role is. What is expected of us? The process – what will happen with the information we provide? What kind of things will the panel need to know? What is our confidentiality status – will you be enquiring into each individual’s circumstance, or would there need to be a cluster of complainants about the same institution?
Who apart from the panel know who we are and what we have disclosed. How honest are we safe to be? How much detail would you want – times, dates, place, abuser’s names? What will be put in place to ensure our physical safety? We may be reporting or disclosing things about people in power – or people who will do anything to ensure we keep quiet about the abuse.
In the paperwork it states that all allegations will be reported to the police – How? Will our names be attached to these reports. Will the police conduct an investigation without our consent? Would our family and friends be interviewed/told? What if our abusers or their accomplices are the police, would that not create a bias? We have been dismissed by the police in the past, we have been threatened by them, belittled by them and in some circumstances put in danger already by them. We as survivors are still not supported, still misdiagnosed with various mental illnesses due to our experience, still stigmatised and still ashamed. We still have no sense of control about how this will proceed. I personally am still afraid to tell the whole truth because of these concerns.
Moving on, the only other quick comments I would make would be around some of the language used. The use of the word “normal” should be avoided when describing non abusive dynamics. It implies that we are in some way “abnormal”. The brainstorming sheets – while they may be helpful to the panel proved to be quite intense and triggering to me, maybe as a sheet, without it being read out may have been less intense.
Finally I have a brief section of what I can contribute to the panel and why my support worker suggested I attend.
I hold a story of a little girl, a teenager and a woman. It’s a story that she needs to tell and be believed. There were people that knew what was happening – people she tried to tell and she was turned aside. She was labelled as a trouble maker – an attention seeker, a fantasist, an alcoholic. Mentally disturbed, suicidal. She was disempowered, institutionalised. She was at a rock bottom and could see no way out other than to remain in the situation or to die. It took nearly 30 years for her to be listened to – for someone to tell her she wasn’t those things, for someone to hold her and tell her she didn’t deserve it. 30 years to give her the strength to believe that abuse wasn’t what she was created for as she had been told. 30 years for her to see that there could be another way to live – that other people didn’t live like she did. Didn’t have to do what she had to do to survive. To teach her that she owned herself, not others.
She knows she was filmed being with these men and she is ashamed because she doesn’t know where these videos are. Whether they still exist, who saw them, who might still be watching them and seeing her like that. She was told in primary school that if a stranger did something bad to her she should scream and run. She asked the teacher what she should do if it was family. They laughed and said that it’s safe and ok for family to touch and kiss children, they didn’t understand what she was trying to say. When she grew too old for this family member he left her life and the church visits stopped. When he returned one week she was scared, she hid after school. When found by the headmaster of the private school she attended she tried to tell him that she was scared of home, that she was scared that this man would rape her again. She was told that she was talking rubbish. That she was very privileged to have a loving family that contributed so much to the school. That she was mistaken, that he knew her family well and had done for years. That it was stupid to be afraid of a loving Godly family and that he was angry that I would think and say such awful things about them, that she must be very sick. He did not ever want to hear another word about it and neither would anyone else. At the age of 13/14 she kept trying to run away, thinking she could escape the memories and herself.
She had been told by other people that she was dirty, that it was her that tempted men. That that was her job and to get on with it. During her grammar school and A-levels she again tried to seek help. She was self harming and self medicating the pain and when asked what was wrong tried to tell about her past. For this control was completely taken away from her. She was presented with a list of consequences for telling – and the only way she could stop this was to say she had been lying, to say she had made it up for attention and to confirm to herself that everything she had ever been told about telling what had happened and what was happening was true. That it would tear apart her family. That it would kill her mother, that people would look at her with disgust. She vowed to never say anything again.
esther9982 