Sex abuse support group lists 99 cases of church failure

AS AUSTRALIA'S most senior Catholics told the media that the Catholic Church had changed immeasurably for the better in the past 20 years in tackling clergy sex abuse, a victims group cited 99 instances where it said the church's so-called Melbourne Response had failed them.

Archbishop of Sydney Cardinal George Pell said on Tuesday the church was victim of a ''persistent press campaign'' that significantly exaggerated the problem.

He told a press conference the church was serious about tackling the issue, and objected to it being described as ''the only cab in the rank'', while Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart - chairman of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference - said the church had taken decisive steps to make child safety a priority and to help victims.

But a victims group claims the Melbourne Response, set up by Cardinal Pell in 1996 when he was archbishop of Melbourne, is flawed and has often failed victims.

The Melbourne Victims Collective submitted 99 instances of what it says are church failures to the Victorian parliamentary inquiry into the churches' handling of child sex abuse on Monday. 

Victims advocate Helen Last said the ''misdemeanours'' included mismanagement of complaints, neglect, absence of promised pastoral support, conflict of interest and secrecy.

They were experiences that victims described as ''wrong, un-Christian, confusing, cruel and unusual, intimidating, coercive, anxiety-provoking, distressing and re-traumatising''.

Ms Last said in one case a victim whom the church accepted was abused by a nun also reported a man as co-abuser, but the man was not investigated further. The victim later recognised him as a prominent paedophile priest.

In another case, a woman who was the victim of many sexual assaults from adolescence on, told 10 priests in the confessional of her assaults, but never received any pastoral follow-up or advice to tell police.

She said accused priests might not be monitored or restricted, still able to be part of the victim's community, which caused huge distress and confusion for victims, their families and communities.

An alleged abuser was allowed to stay in contact with parishioners, soliciting support and spreading derogatory information about the victim's family, and another stayed living in the victim's area and was reported loitering outside the victim's school.

Ms Last said victims were put through long and arduous processes without their own advocates, support or lawyers, while the accused had lawyers, and the victims and their offenders might be seated in the same room for up to four days.

She said victims were led to believe that they were the first to complain about their offender when previous complaints had been received.