text: She says any new legislation should consider factors such as the adequacy of the compensation provided, whether the survivors had legal representation or not, and whether the institution had concealed the extent of its knowledge of the abuser’s behaviour.
  “What knowledge did the institution have of the particular offender at the time of the deed of release and the settlement,” Dr Courtin says.
  “[The legislation] needs to treat this group of victims and survivors as a special group; it’s a unique class of claimants.
  “They need to be separated out and differentiated from deeds of release that are being signed in car accidents, workplace injuries … because with those types of settlements the decision maker is a third-party, independent person or in a court, and of course all those decisions are reviewable, unlike the decisions that were made in church institutions.”
  Survivors are not able to simultaneously pursue a civil claim for compensation while engaging with the national redress scheme.
  However, those who have already signed settlements in the past are able to access top-up payments through the scheme.
  Mr O’Leary says those limitations are why he wants to pursue compensation for his abuse through the courts instead.
  “The redress is clearly a train wreck, no one knows what’s going on … the only way to get justice is to go to court,” he says.
  “I’m really looking forward to being able to take it to court and have our day in court and get through it, and – for once in our lives – have justice.”