May 26, 2010

Are you having issues with ACC Sensitive Claims Unit?

The new Review Panel wants to hear from you:

“We welcome feedback and input from clients of the Sensitive Claims Unit. We also wish to support people to do this in a way that suits them best”

The review panel welcome submissions on the Clinical Pathway.

Could you send this care of or send by post to the following address: PO Box 1039 Wellington (Key St). 


  1. Hi,

    Any idea what areas or concerns they're concentrating on? Do they have a website with their brief, process and framework?

    I couldn't find anything, but was wanting to write any submission based on their framework, so they're more likely to take it seriously.


  2. What I do know is they are looking very closely at the "original" Massey University study and how ACC merely butchered the research, taking ONE recommendation to fit ALL cases - predominately the PTSD recommendations.

    In my view, there is nothing "wrong" as such with the research and the recommendations but the Clinical Pathways, introduced by Peter Jansen do nothing to resemble this - even if (to this day) he claims the support from Massey - um, they don't by the way.

    Having said that, the Clinical Pathway Guidelines that WERE enforced, if they were actually implemented, would be 100% improvement on what is happening today.

    Points to note:
    (From my viewpoint)

    1. Clients should NOT be subjected to a clinical assessment with strangers - not once, not twice, but in some cases 3-4 times BEFORE being approved for counselling.

    2. ACC focus on the event rather than the effect - there are cases where children were refused counseling on the basis that they came from a dysfunctional family and that was the cause of their problems, and not that they were sexually abused. Anyone who sexually abuses a child, in my view,, HAS to come from a dysfunctional family, surely.

    There are a lot of info on the Swamp Report (heaps of info in fact) about this very issue - link on page) but I think, for now, they want to hear from people who are/have experienced the CP and where they think the system could have been better - particular interest in how the "syste," has effected the person negatively.

    Hope that helps.

  3. Thanks Jax,

    I'm not sure if I'm strong enough to write a full submission - I was hoping they'd make it easy by having an online form to fill in... No such luck!

    Take care,

  4. That might be a good suggestion for them to consider CG. I do know they are looking into all sorts of ways for people to comment.. I will email them that suggestion.

    However, thanks to Nick Smith's dawdling on this, the six months they had to come up with a review, end in July and they have only just this week, been "allocated" an independent email address for submissions. Understandably, he doesn't want the review to point out how brutally careless he has been so sabotaging this review has to be in his best interests.

    I am sorry you feel so deflated by your won experience with ACC that you cannot find the strength to take up the Review Panel's offer but I completely understand at the same time. It is draining and sometimes, especially in this cold weather, it's better to just snuggle up and keep yourself (literally) safe and warm.

    The Review Panel will not be able to use every one's experience and put those to the Government as evidence of some things needing to be changed but I do believe that someone would have written a similiar experience to that of yours and so you will still be kind of heard - if you know what I mean.

    Take care, keep warm, keep safe.



For troubleshooting, email: