Debate - Why is rape counciling covered under ACC?

[DRTDVL 0]

I've been thinking about it for a bit and i just don't understand it...

ACC as per their website: http://www.acc.co.nz/index.htm

The Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) provides comprehensive, no-fault personal injury cover for all New Zealand residents and visitors to New Zealand.

shouldn't rape councilling be covered under something like Victim Support http://www.victimsupport.org.nz/aboutus.htm

Victim Support has two primary objectives:

To provide information, support and assistance to individual victims, witnesses, their families and friends.

To raise public awareness and recognition of the effects of crime and promote victim's rights.

Victim Support provides 24-hour emotional support, personal advocacy and information to all people affected by crime and trauma throughout New Zealand. By striving to meet these objectives we aim to provide a comprehensive, flexible service to reduce the effects of crime and trauma.

It's a act of crime not accident that has caused the trauma so why is it delt with as an accident and not a crime?

How much other stuff is ACC being used to fund that really should be covered by something more approriate? Have we just decided to use ACC as a coverall for support requirements to help "reduce" department expenditure?

[Apex 693]

Vtec is a Taboo word around here mate.

Whatever we say won’t do any good, no rape victims shouldn’t be covered by ACC as its not an accident it’s a crime, as you say that is what victim support is for.

I'll be a very happy man if I can cut ties with ACC and pay a privet entity to cover me against income and health and accident insurance, I might even be able to claim flybuys.

[MLM 57]

My 2c and i could be completly wrong would be that acc covers rape councilling due to the differences in how each of these organisations are run and funded.

My understanding of it is that Victim Support is an organisation which offers help from their internal team such as advice and referrals yet do not have the budget to fund the councelling itself.

Acc on the other hand is set up to subsidise/fund persons who due to circumstances out of their control require medical attention be it mental of physical.

Yes rape councilling fits under the moniker of Victim support better however ACC is set up to get rape victims the support they need via councelling etc

[Wom 0]

maybe ACC is the wrong organisation to be paying for it, but if they don't then who will?

Victim Support doesn't have the funding to provide that sort of service

[DRTDVL 0]

Vtec is a Taboo word around here mate.

I thought it was taboo for use in related to non-criminal acts

My 2c and i could be completly wrong would be that acc covers rape councilling due to the differences in how each of these organisations are run and funded.

My understanding of it is that Victim Support is an organisation which offers help from their internal team such as advice and referrals yet do not have the budget to fund the councelling itself.

Acc on the other hand is set up to subsidise/fund persons who due to circumstances out of their control require medical attention be it mental of physical.

Yes rape councilling fits under the moniker of Victim support better however ACC is set up to get rape victims the support they need via councelling etc

Yeah, thats why they where wanting the mental illness tag, to make it fit within the charter of ACC... Shouldn't it be that if it's out side the charter of the department but it's being covered then we either need to change the charter of ACC or properly setup the departments who's charter it is to provide the support?

maybe ACC is the wrong organisation to be paying for it, but if they don't then who will?

Victim Support doesn't have the funding to provide that sort of service

So change the funding to have it appropriately covered by the correct department. Also the new levy on convictions should go to paying part of the costs.

Also suicide shouldn't be covered - i DON'T agree that people should get paid support for sucide... I'm sorry it's harsh - I've had a flatmate gas themselves, and i was the last person to talk to her alive... maybe it's just me but if i'm having problems with someones death i don't expect the government/you and you to pay for me.

Edited October 28, 2009 by DRTDVL

[Wom 0]

I don't mind some of my taxes going towards support for any person with a mental illness ... doesn't matter whether they were a victim of a crime or they know someone who committed suicide

But you are right, shouldn't be ACC providing the support

[oldskool 4]

Ok Rant Time...............lol

There is a greater fundamental issue here guys & girls............

There is no doubt that ACC has become a sticky plaster for all wounds over the years, and regardless of who should get what etc, as I could fill pages on my opinion here, but we know opinions are like a**holes everyone got one just doesnt mean you need to listen/sniff them all right........

Anyway back to the point, ACC was never ever designed to be self funding, it was supposed to work on approx 1 - 1.5 % of national payroll, it was always foreseen that there would be ups & downs, however it was probably not foreseen that it would ultimately cover so many things & that varoius persons within the respective governments would come to the decision that it should be self funding........

Given that ACC removes a great deal of rights from the individual, e.g right for redress, right of claim, against the party that caused or provided the environment for injury, it should be liable for all claims in respect to cost related to the injury, as ACC have taken away the individuals right to seek any other avenue of restitution.

As ACC will not accept this position & continues to dictate to claimants, the only fair resolution is to disband the current system & give the individual back the right to claim against the party or organisation that was/is responsible for the injury.

This would however cause huge issues as most people would not have the funds to undertake a legal suit, we would in effect become as litegious as the States and a great number of people on both sides of the argument would suffer to a greater level than they do under the current system.

However if certain areas were freed up, as alluded to above by Apex, it should follow that ACC levies and the like would reduce, however I am sure we all know well enough that once any government has been able to put into law the ability to secure more levies from Joe Public, it is very unlikely to reduce those levies...............Consolidated Fund anyone ???

The very real outcome will be that the current increases being discussed & those that have been passed will remain in effect & partial privatisation will also come into play.......however do not expect any of the new levies once in place to be removed, we will therefor end up paying twice as much for less cover plus have to pay for additional cover to cover the cover lost................

Governments Hey..................Become an MP and jump on the Gravy 747..................ha ha.............hmmmmmmm.

End of Rant.................except for this.............Vtec victims should get support, very few crimes are worse from a trauma point of view. Sport is not work unless you are a proffesional sports person. 4 wheeler bikes have the highest % of claimants of any motorised vehicle, levie them accordingly at point of purchase,as many are not registered. And finaly thank C**st crimanals will no longer be elligable for acc in most cases !!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok Done...............

Edited October 29, 2009 by oldskool

[westy 614]

ACC covers injury from other crimes, why not rape?

[Shady 0]

I think they just need to start up another programme to support victims of rape & assault etc.

ACC should strictly be for work related injuries or injuries that stop you from working. Maybe something like "VOSC" - Victims Of Serious Crimes. ACC is already in mega debt? So why not try get out of debt by making other programmes for non-work related?

Although I fully support the Govt supporting people who have been raped or seriously assaulted. They need to have another programme setup just for them.

Just M2CW.

Edited October 29, 2009 by Shady

[Guest Simon*]

Fail

New programme = new staff, offices, regulations, legislation ,..... = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$,$$.00

There are already too many government departments, too much overstaffing

[antil33t 90]

It's because John Key gets paid far too much.

Also, they should cut all funding for criminals.

Edited October 29, 2009 by antil33t

[sp8s 1]

ACC sucks

end of rant

[DRTDVL 0]

I think they just need to start up another programme to support victims of rape & assault etc.

ACC should strictly be for work related injuries or injuries that stop you from working. Maybe something like "VOSC" - Victims Of Serious Crimes. ACC is already in mega debt? So why not try get out of debt by making other programmes for non-work related?

Although I fully support the Govt supporting people who have been raped or seriously assaulted. They need to have another programme setup just for them.

Just M2CW.

They don't need to make a new department... If you actually look at the government departments, there is sooo much duplication of work it's not funny...

Why not utilize departments like hmmm it's an odd name... Victim Support??? Have it come under the department of Corrections charter. Thus "Victims" of crimes are supported by the criminal system.... Or have it as a jointly funded operation by Correction and Health...

I'm personally all for getting someone in to restructure the whole government organisation chart.

Dad's done a bit of work for the Corrections (Prisons) at a high up level as a contractor, and it's a joke. Community Services, Prisons, Parole, etc... are all run organizationally as separate entities all the way to the very top.

Overtime all organisations get bloated and fat and inefficient - most corp enties will then restructure the company - join roles, redevelop areas for different more suited tasks, etc... Very rarely does this happen with government org's.

Wellington City Council is just as bad... The where going to expand a role to have more new work, so instead off utilizing the 3 people with lite work loads that where in the same area, and where currently doing the work, they removed the task from those 3 people and created a new full time role, making 4 people with lite work loads...

[laadeelaa 0]

Rape and sexual abuse causes mental abuse.

Victim councilling councillers are not always fully qualified, they are more volunteers.

ACC councillers are fully qualified and are particularily trained for the sole purpose to interact with Rape and Sexual Abuse victims.

That's the simple difference.

If the amount of councilling covered by ACC for rape and sexual support victims decreases, I think New Zealand will see a hell of a lot more suicides happen.

Victim support is not as helpful as ACC councilling, taking the free councilling sessions from victims is an absolute wrong choice.

Just making another support group shakes up the routine and spends more money which could be saved for helpful purposes.

Some forget that not all rape and sexual assult victims are women, some are little children who have been targeted by pedofiles.

So you who think rape and councilling shouldn't be covered by ACC should have a think, how would you like your little sister, or own child to be in a proposed situation? With limited help and councilling? Do you think they should be able to just suck it up and deal with it?

My 2c.

P.s I know for a fact that a Victim's counciller, who is fully qualified, that works as an ACC counciller only gets paid per visit, not per client, therefore the client only seeks councilling as they need, not because they need to go once a week.

Edited October 30, 2009 by MS BM

[laadeelaa 0]

ACC should strictly be for work related injuries or injuries that stop you from working.

Rape and Sexual Assult causes mental injuries, which do prevent people from working.

[sp8s 1]

Rape and Sexual Assult causes mental injuries, which do prevent people from working.

Rape and sexual abuse are NOT accidents

Make the person who did it pay

And before you rant at me think about it

I know MANY people who have been there - yes I got quals - and even they say its only the money grabbers who go to ACC. Do a poll and see for your self.

Go back on the records and see for your selves who claimed ACC for abuse - check their backgrounds - been there done that and yes the figures are out there just look.

/rant

[laadeelaa 0]

Rape and sexual abuse are NOT accidents

Make the person who did it pay

And before you rant at me think about it

People choose to play rugby, and they get injured, that's their choice. So choosing to play a sport, having in mind you may get injured, is covered by ACC. You don't ask the person who tackled and hurt you to pay the bill do you?

Rape and Sexual assult victims don't choose to be put through their situations. Do they?

I can't imagine any small child choosing to have something happen to them?

I know MANY people who have been there - yes I got quals - and even they say its only the money grabbers who go to ACC. Do a poll and see for your self.

Go back on the records and see for your selves who claimed ACC for abuse - check their backgrounds - been there done that and yes the figures are out there just look.

/rant

Does it not occur to you that people who have "rough" backgrounds maybe more vulnerable to sexual assult? They may not have the protection or "safety concious" mentalities.

Just because they may be from a rough neighbourhood and they may be under the benefit - that it no excuse to claim that the victims are "money grabbers".

No one should have to be put through something like sexual assult, especially no 7 year old girl.

I think your opinion is biased towards a very critical point of view.

I just can't believe you are accusing rape and sexual assult victims as money grabbers.

That is sick.

[DRTDVL 0]

People choose to play rugby, and they get injured, that's their choice. So choosing to play a sport, having in mind you may get injured, is covered by ACC. You don't ask the person who tackled and hurt you to pay the bill do you?

Rape and Sexual assult victims don't choose to be put through their situations. Do they?

I can't imagine any small child choosing to have something happen to them?

Does it not occur to you that people who have "rough" backgrounds maybe more vulnerable to sexual assult? They may not have the protection or "safety concious" mentalities.

Just because they may be from a rough neighbourhood and they may be under the benefit - that it no excuse to claim that the victims are "money grabbers".

No one should have to be put through something like sexual assult, especially no 7 year old girl.

I think your opinion is biased towards a very critical point of view.

I just can't believe you are accusing rape and sexual assult victims as money grabbers.

That is sick.

You missed the fundamental point i was making... Rape/Sexual abuse is not an accident it is a CRIME... Thats the major point of difference between some one tweaking an ankle in a rugby game and a person of ANY age being raped/sexually assaulted.

You mentioned earlier that Victim Support isn't able to provide support because its not setup for it... Why is that? It's because previously it was covered by ACC, what i was saying is that the government agencies need to be restructured to include and fund relevent items related to their department. Victim Support SHOULD cover this, and maybe we should look at restructuring the ACC / Corrections / Justice Systems to properly distribute claims. 

It's the same with your car insurance there is a section on it regarding Medical Costs as a result of an accident. Because it's not compulsory to have 3rd party insurance, we all have to pay for uninsured drivers medical costs and the people they injure.