Concerns for ACC Counselling for Sexual Abuse

Concerns for ACC Counselling for Sexual Abuse

We are counsellors, psychotherapists and psychologists in the Nelson region who are all accredited providers of counselling for sexual abuse for ACC Sensitive Claims Unit. We are trained, experienced and committed professionals.

ACC policy makers are introducing drastic changes in the delivery of this important service which has been available to the people of NZ for many years. Proposed ACC changes create a significant professional dilemma for practitioners. In response, counsellors and psychotherapists are forced to decide whether to continue or whether to discontinue with the provision of ACC funded counselling services. If they continue they are concerned that they will breach their Code of Ethics.

Some have already reluctantly decided to withhold services by not taking on new clients under ACC funding. This stand is taken out of regard for the safety of individuals seeking our help and in our belief that this is in the best public interest.

It is vital for us to stress that we are not withdrawing our counselling services from our current clients. Of course we will continue to work with anyone to whom we have already made a therapeutic commitment.

We have many objections to the proposed changes, such as:
• breaks and delays in continuity of service especially at the outset of counselling when the client is extremely vulnerable
• exclusion of provider (counsellor) in treatment assessment and goal setting
• disregard for the need for specific training or experience in treating sexual abuse in those selected as service gatekeepers at SCU
• disregard for the value of the therapeutic relationship. Clients may now be directed to a named counsellor by ACC (who is different from the person they first chose to see).
• invasive information seeking by SCU e.g. from GP
• arbitrary limitation on sexual abuse therapy, regardless of whether it is for a single assault on an adult, sexual abuse on a child, or an adult with history of childhood sexual abuse
• massively inappropriate administrative costs for counselling (Currently administrative costs are more than nine times the costs allocated for counselling!)
• treating persons who have been sexually abused as ‘unwell’ (through use of psychiatric diagnosis) rather than as victims of crime
• cultural insensitivity for Maori and Pacifica clients
• insensitivity for special needs of children and adolescents

We ask that ACC: -
• Collaborate with those who are treatment providers both in planning and implementing changes
• Decide on changes after an evaluation of the service and adjust only what is necessary, maintaining what is running well.
• Work with providers to eliminate ethical and practice concerns the current proposed pathway raises.
• Realistically assess resource accessibility and availability for sexual abuse treatment agencies and Mental Health Services given the extra unfunded workload shift being proposed.

As stated before, some counsellors and psychotherapists have already withdrawn their services and will not be taking on new clients. If proposed ACC changes go ahead unaltered we anticipate that many more will join, as to breach our code of ethics is unacceptable to us.

WE URGE ACC TO STOP THE PROPOSED PATHWAY PROCEEDING

Ana Dorrington, MNZAC and DAPAANZ

Angela Fanning, MNZAC

Barbelle Boaz, Registered Psychotherapist

Bets Stallard, MNZAC

Briar Haven, MNZAC

Burke Hunter, Registered Psychotherapist, MNZAP

Christine Gillespie, Registered Psychotherapist, MNZAP

Elaine Partridge, MNAC

Geoffrey Samuels, MNZAP, MNZCCP, Registered Clinical Psychologist

Madeleine Pryce, MNZAC

Mary Jerram, Registered Psychotherapist, MNZAP

Marylyn Tait, Interim Registered Psychotherapist, NZAP (provisional)

Renee Alleyne NZAC ANZPA

Rosella O’Neil, MNZAC

Stacey Bowker, MNZAC

Susan Hawthorne, Registered Psychotherapist, MNZAP

Yvonne Audier, MNZAC

ENDS