Read on Twitter
Yesterday the Victorian Govt/ @JillHennessyMP announced they intend to reform the sexual assault victim gag-law & next month will perform consultation "round tables".
This has raised expectations in the survivor community & I've fielded questions like this all day:
#LetUsSpeak
This has raised expectations in the survivor community & I've fielded questions like this all day:
#LetUsSpeak
Survivors want to know how to get involved & how consultations will work. So far no info has been provided except the word "round tables" has been used.
This has created both expectation & anxiety over how privacy and vicarious trauma would be managed in a "Zoom roundtable".
This has created both expectation & anxiety over how privacy and vicarious trauma would be managed in a "Zoom roundtable".
I suspect the Government does not intend to have Zoom roundtables with members of the public because the risk of vicarious trauma and privacy violation would be through the roof. (Plus broadcasting survivors identities to each other would - ironically - break the gag law).
The problem for @JillHennessyMP is that by saying that there will be consultations and roundtables, survivors now expect that they can be involved in... well... consultations & round tables. If the Govt now restrict this opportunity to a small number of carefully cherry picked /
survivors who they are on good terms with, OTHER survivors will feel excluded and 'gagged' all over again. I'm not sure why they would announce "round tables" - which both raises expectations while also raising anxiety and panic over privacy - without any further information.
The lack of clarity means I have no information to give to people. No place to direct them to.
It feels like a rushed out press release designed to restore the Govt's reputation which has now raised yet more questions, expectations & anxieties for survivors.
It feels like a rushed out press release designed to restore the Govt's reputation which has now raised yet more questions, expectations & anxieties for survivors.
It would be great if clarity could be provided on all of this. Specifically:
-will the consultations be closed or open to the public
-how will privacy be managed
-if it is not open, how will survivors be selected to participate and on what grounds?
-will the consultations be closed or open to the public
-how will privacy be managed
-if it is not open, how will survivors be selected to participate and on what grounds?
AND IF the consultations ARE open to the public then I think it's important to remind the Govt, that it would be highly unethical to invite survivors to perform the emotional labor of revisiting their trauma if the "solution" has already been agreed upon behind the scenes.
If consultations with survivor groups are just a tokenistic tick-the-box endeavor then that is highly problematic.
If the answers are already before you, then there is a risk of over-consulting too.
If the answers are already before you, then there is a risk of over-consulting too.
This all feels a bit messy.
Clarity is needed.
(And just for the sake of full disclosure I have the survivors consent to share that redacted email above).
/Fin
Clarity is needed.
(And just for the sake of full disclosure I have the survivors consent to share that redacted email above).
/Fin
