Representing Survivors: A Critical Analysis of Recommendations to Resolve Northern Ireland’s Historical Child Abuse Claims

Abstract

Historical child abuse is an issue of major public concern internationally. Remarkably, survivors’ needs are significantly underrepresented in practices of redress.1 This article makes an original contribution to filling that empirical research deficit in the Northern Ireland context of historical institutional child abuse. It theoretically and substantively analyses the Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry redress recommendations made for institutional child abuse between 1922 and 1995. The recommendations are critiqued from the standpoint of survivors and the work of the survivor-led Panel of Experts on Redress. Key aspects of the proposed redress scheme are analysed and the likely effects on survivors’ rights and interests are explored. This article concludes that while there are positive elements to the redress proposals, recommendations do not represent survivors’ needs. If implemented, they could re-victimize survivors by disadvantaging or disentitling those who suffered the most serious abuse and impose a process that would create a hierarchy of claims. Alternative approaches, more representative of survivors’ needs, are introduced to correct these flaws are discussed.