An Open letter from 40 survivors of Church abuse co-ordinated by Survivors Voices.
Letter copied below, or can be downloaded here.
Dear members of Synod and Archbishops’ Council,
As you decide on the future of safeguarding in the Church of England this month, and implement your decision, please listen to the voices of survivors of church-based abuse. Unlike staff and church leaders, we have no forum to gather our collective voice. So the Survivors Voices faith-based abuse group sought survivors’ views through an open meeting and survey; others added their views by email and on social media. This is a summary of nearly 40 responses.
The Church can no longer be trusted to manage its own safeguarding
- survivors and the public no longer have confidence in the church to deliver
- effective safeguarding
- people are disillusioned with the church and the present leadership
- people need to have confidence that the church is a safe space
Full independence is essential
- 90% of survivors supported option 4
- the church shouldn’t be investigating allegations – they’re invested in covering up and protecting the institution
- safeguarding staff deserve to work for an independent organisation dedicated to creating a safe space for all, free from church influence
- some say it doesn’t go far enough – we don’t need “greater” independence but a fully independent body with real powers
- should be one safeguarding body run nationally, that all institutions have to put funds into, but have no control
We need consistent national processes, to professional standards, with local support
- a minority of survivors support option 3, because of the importance of local relationships, especially support for parishes
- survivors experience significant inconsistency between dioceses and local responses
- a clear nationwide process is vital, especially for complaints
- safeguarding practitioners should be regulated
External scrutiny with teeth is vital
- the scrutiny body must have powers to enforce compliance it should have the power to:
- investigate complaints and have the final say in outcomes
- initiate/take disciplinary action
- require co-operation and documents to be produced
- require apology, therapy, redress for victims
- ensure policy, practice and training meet approved standards
- sanction the church if it doesn’t co-operate
Must be trauma-responsive and understand faith-based abuse
- trauma-informed means understanding the depth of hurt and betrayal
- need to understand the unique nature of spiritual and church-based abuse and the impact of harm caused in a faith setting
- recognise the misuse of trust, coercive control, vulnerability of adults as well as children
Must include survivors in the design, creation and governance of the new bodies
- The inclusion of survivors is the safeguarding
- implement the recommendations of Wilkinson and Jay that the new bodies must be set up by independent experts, not the church
- transparency and accountability are essential
- there must be a duty to ensure survivors received care and support
- safeguarding should be person-centred and based on survivors wishes and feelings
The response group report suggested that survivors expect too much. This is patronising; we understand the difference between statutory and voluntary bodies’ responsibilities. It’s not that we expect too much, but the church delivers too little.
The report suggested that some victims expect the church to respond to trauma that isn’t safeguarding. We question the suggestion that you can be the wrong kind of survivor. Our experiences don’t fit neatly into into spreadsheets, but we assert that actions that meet a threshold of significant harm are always safeguarding.
Some of us have had good experiences with some dioceses and safeguarding practitioners, and some of us have engaged with the church to make things better. We can recognise the improvements that have begun, but while there isn’t independent investigation and scrutiny, we don’t think this is enough.
We recognise that the church will always retain responsibility for safeguarding; safeguarding is everybody’s business. The report focuses on responding to allegations, but we also need to ensure preventative safeguarding and responses to survivors happens well, creating healthy cultures in our churches which bring about safety, create a place for healing and attend to the flourishing of all.
When you vote on Tuesday please remember that the current system has failed to prevent abuse and cover up, failed to always hold abusers, and those who fail to safeguard, to account, and failed to always respond well to survivors. All abuse is a misuse of power, a betrayal of trust. Responses to abuse that focus on protection of the church rather than justice, are another misuse of power. There’s no safeguarding without accountability. Survivors are looking for justice, apology, redress and their pain to be learnt from.
This is a kairos moment, a tipping point for the church which needs courage and bravery to act. The church should stand for redemptive justice but that has not been there for many of us. The church should offer victims hope, help and healing but often we have felt abandoned and re-abused. The church feels fragmented and disintegrated by safeguarding, but getting this right will bring about greater unity because church will be safer place. Do you have the courage to make that happen?
Yours, survivors of abuse.