After a week of what can only be described as horrific stories from the Royal Commission into Institutional Child Sex Abuse, Monday’s hearing may appear to readers almost as a day of relative respite.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
But although the hearings were free from the terrible suffering of individual victims that dominated last week, there was evidence that hinted at the brutal malevolence which originated these atrocities and has brought Ballarat so much ill repute.
University of NSW associate professor Carolyn Quadrio told the commission she believed that celibacy was not the driving cause of the abuse.
She noted it seemed to be more marked in Catholic institutions and she hinted at the more sinister possibility that predators were primarily drawn to the institutions because of the power they had over children.
Although many will dispute her claims, the inquiring nature of Professor Quadrio’s thinking lends itself to further investigation of how any institution could allow this deviance and, critically, how it can be prevented in future.
The commission must have several objectives if it is to fulfil its vital overarching role of addressing institutional sexual abuse in Australia.
The first is as a platform for victims to tell their stories. The cathartic release and vindication this allows cannot be overestimated, and The Courier both applauds and supports those who have had the courage to do so.
But the commission also has the important role of seeking redress.
How it uncovers the truth about what happened in Ballarat, which institutions exacerbated this, and to what degree, are key to fulfilling its long-term role in prevention.
Professor Quadrio’s evidence is not a complete answer, but it sheds light on the complex whys behind this horrendous abuse. Simplistic explanations of motives will not serve the victims or vulnerable children of the future.
Branding the worst of these offenders as monsters may garner some emotional and moral satisfaction, but it can all too easily distract from the broader objectives of the commission.
Critically, the investigation of these difficult questions of motive can go some way into understanding the perversity and help guide the commission in its recommendations.