Applying the ConFIRM Model to Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Claims: Maximising Redress and Civil Justice

---

Institutional child sexual abuse claims are among the most complex and sensitive matters facing the legal system. For many survivors, the actions of individual offenders are central to their experience and pursuit of justice. However, focusing solely on individuals can sometimes obscure the broader institutional factors that allowed abuse to occur and persist. To achieve meaningful redress and drive genuine change, it is crucial to examine not just individual actions, but also the systems and structures that enabled harm.

Why Traditional Approaches Can Limit Outcomes

• Many investigations concentrate on immediate circumstances or individual misconduct, which may resonate with some survivors’ experiences but can miss deeper, system-wide failures.

  
  

• Corrective actions and recommendations are often limited to local fixes (e.g., more training or new policies), rather than addressing root causes at higher levels (such as regulatory oversight or board governance).

  
  

• Survivors may find it difficult to demonstrate the full extent of institutional responsibility, which can limit access to redress or fair compensation.

How ConFIRM Supports a System-Wide Approach

The ConFIRM model, developed as a systems thinking-based incident analysis method, offers a way to honour individual experiences while also uncovering broader patterns of institutional failure:

• Maps All Actors and Controls: ConFIRM prompts analysis at every level involved in institutional care—from government and regulators to boards, management, frontline staff, and external influences (such as funding bodies or community expectations).

  
  

• Identifies Both Individual and Systemic Factors: By first recognising which controls, processes, or behaviours operated as intended to prevent harm, ConFIRM then reveals what was missing or failed—helping to show how both individual actions and institutional shortcomings contributed to abuse.

  
  

• Visualises Institutional Responsibility: The model enables clear visual representation of how decisions at higher levels (e.g., policy, regulation) cascade down to affect frontline safety and child protection.

Maximising Redress Scheme Outcomes

Redress schemes often require claimants to demonstrate not just that abuse occurred, but that there were systemic failures enabling it. Applying ConFIRM can:

• Uncover System-Wide Failures: By systematically mapping failed controls and feedback mechanisms across all levels, survivors and their advocates can present compelling evidence of institutional responsibility—not just isolated incidents.

  
  

• Strengthen Claims with Evidence: The structured approach provides a clear audit trail of what should have happened versus what did, supporting stronger applications for redress.

  
  

• Support Sustainable Change: Recommendations generated through ConFIRM target both immediate and systemic contributors to abuse, helping institutions demonstrate genuine commitment to reform—an important factor in redress assessments.

Supporting Civil Claims Where Redress Is Inadequate

In cases where redress schemes cannot respond to the gravity of abuse (due to caps, exclusions, or other limitations), ConFIRM provides a powerful foundation for civil litigation:

• Demonstrates Organisational Negligence: By documenting failures at every level—board, management, regulatory oversight—ConFIRM helps establish the foreseeability and preventability of harm.

  
  

• Links Systemic Issues to Individual Harm: The model’s visual mapping makes it easier for courts to see how high-level decisions (or omissions) created conditions for abuse.

  
  

• Enables Targeted Remedies: Corrective actions developed through ConFIRM can inform settlement negotiations or court orders aimed at genuine institutional reform.

Practical Steps for Legal Practitioners

1. Adopt ConFIRM’s Five-Step Process:

   • Build a timeline of events.

   • Identify high-risk activities and relevant hazards (e.g., unsupervised contact, lack of reporting mechanisms).

   • Map controls and feedback mechanisms that worked—and those that didn’t—across all system levels.

   • Visually review findings to identify patterns of failure or success.

   • Develop corrective actions that address both immediate and systemic issues.

   
   

2. Train Teams in Systems Thinking: Equip legal teams and survivor advocates with tools to look beyond surface-level issues and uncover broader institutional responsibility.

   
   

3. Use Visual Mapping in Submissions: Present findings in a way that is accessible for redress assessors, mediators, or courts—making the case for both compensation and reform.

Conclusion

Applying the ConFIRM model to institutional child sexual abuse claims allows us to respect the importance of individual accountability while also ensuring that institutions are held responsible for the systems and cultures that enabled harm. This approach not only maximises redress scheme outcomes but also strengthens civil claims where redress falls short. ConFIRM empowers survivors and their advocates to drive meaningful change in institutions entrusted with children’s care.

Dr Matt Woolley PhD, LLB

Pier One Law

matt@pieronelaw.com.au