Child sexual abuse: The power of an apology

The three-year time limit for victims and survivors of child sexual abuse to bring claims for compensation is to be axed, which is welcome news. This restriction has long been a major barrier preventing survivors of child sexual abuse from accessing justice.

Under existing law, where abuse occurs as a child, civil claims must be brought within three years of turning 18 unless the survivor can prove that a fair trial can proceed despite the time delay. For most survivors, this is an unrealistic expectation. Childhood sexual abuse often remains unspoken for many years, with victims disclosing their experiences when they reach adulthood. Studies have shown that on average, it takes between 24 and 27 years for a survivor to come forward. As a result, almost all abuse claims are brought outside the statutory time limit. If the survivor cannot then persuade the court that a fair trial is still possible, the claim fails entirely and no justice can be obtained. This reform is a step towards a fairer process that puts the needs of survivors first.

What else is changing?

The government has also announced that it will amend the law on apologies. Employers will ‘be encouraged to apologise to people wronged by their employees, where currently they fear doing so because of institutional liability, meaning that victims are likelier to receive apologies from schools, care facilities or hospitals for abuse carried out by an individual at these institutions’.

This is significant for survivors of abuse because an apology can be transformative and serve as a pivotal moment of validation and healing. There is currently no legal requirement that an apology be offered to survivors, either by the individual perpetrator or the institution on whose watch the abuse took place.

In her book The Power of Apology, Beverly Engel, a psychotherapist and advocate for abuse victims, looks at the power a genuine apology can hold. It ‘is crucial to our mental and even physical health. Research shows that receiving an apology has a noticeable, positive physical effect on the body… blood pressure decreases, heart rate slows, and breathing becomes steadier’. Apologies also help people to move past their anger and heal emotionally.

In many cases that I see, abuse was committed many years ago and sometimes the perpetrator has since died. In others, we have found evidence that abuse could have been prevented had appropriate action been taken. It is in cases such as these that an apology from the responsible institution or employer can be particularly powerful. In so many abuse cases, the workplace culture is one of cover-ups and ‘turning a blind eye’ to abusive behaviour or allegations of abuse. Mandating sincere apologies to abuse survivors can act as a powerful impetus to challenge toxic cultures and tackle allegations head-on.

To be effective, however, this amendment needs to provide a clear definition of what constitutes an apology. For example, in Canadian law, an apology in these circumstances is defined as an expression of sympathy or regret, a statement of saying sorry or ‘other words or actions indicating guilt, regret, or sympathy’. It is also noted that the apology is specifically related to the subject matter being acknowledged. Time will tell how forthcoming these apologies are, how genuine, and therefore how significant they are for survivors.

For lawyers, there is no need to wait for a change in the law to push for apologies as part of civil proceedings – this should be front and centre of a claim for those survivors who wish it to be. It is also possible to investigate other ways to help support emotional healing for clients. For example, we recently secured a statement from the Forfeiture Committee in relation to known abuser Peter Sherwin, confirming that had Sherwin still been alive it would have taken steps to strip him of his MBE. Steps like this can be crucial in helping survivors move forward with their lives.

These latest reforms show progress by the government with regard to the recommendations put forward by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) in 2022. The government has also recently confirmed that, as part of the Crime and Policing Bill, it will introduce a mandatory reporting duty for those working with children to report sexual abuse; legislate to make grooming an aggravating factor when sentencing child sexual offences; and that it will ensure police forces improve data collection on child sexual abuse.

However, some recommendations from the inquiry still need to be progressed, such as addressing the need for a national redress scheme for England and Wales. Professor Alexis Jay, chair of the IICSA, acknowledged before the Home Affairs Committee earlier this year that some of the recommendations could take years to implement, because they would require primary legislation and, of course, any proposed redress scheme would be expensive.

There is more to be done, but for now we must the hope that more apologies and the eradication of time limits for abuse claims will provide survivors with greater degrees of both justice and closure.

Rebecca Sheriff is a partner in the abuse team at Bolt Burdon Kemp, London