Claims relating to sexual and physical abuse require that it be established that an incident or incidents of abuse occurred.
The Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission has acknowledged that it is difficult to obtain evidence to establish that abuse occurred for a variety of reasons. These reasons include that there may be no witnesses to the abuse, records may be incomplete or may not exist, or reporting may have been difficult or discouraged.
In recognition of the evidentiary difficulties faced by survivors of physical and sexual abuse, delegates are advised that claimants’ personal accounts, in the form of statutory declarations, may be accepted as evidence in support of claims. The ability for delegates to accept statutory declarations is consistent amongst all claimants, irrespective of their age at the time of the alleged incident. Commissions' policy is that:
· In the absence of contradictory evidence, delegates will always accept a credible statutory declaration as sufficient to establish the fact of abuse in claims related to incidents of physical or sexual abuse of members of the ADF. Statutory declarations are to be examined in the context of the available evidence, including cluster data and personal files in order to determine credibility. A service connection must also be established for liability to be accepted.
· It is important to note that a statutory declaration is not the only means by which a claimant can establish the fact of abuse. Nor are delegates encouraged to reject claimants' personal accounts that fail to meet the above criteria.
This policy will assist with the first aspect of the claims process – establishing that an incident of abuse occurred. It remains the case that for a claim to be successful, the delegate must be satisfied that a diagnosed medical condition exists and the condition and abuse event is related to a person’s ADF service.
The acceptance of liability does not automatically mean that compensation will be payable. If liability is accepted, the normal compensation assessments will occur.
Statutory Declaration
Where a person provides evidence in support of their claim in the form of a personal account, the account should be provided by way of a statutory declaration.
The statutory declaration must be provided by the person who allegedly suffered the abuse unless the person is medically or legally incapable of providing a personal account, in which case the personal account must be provided on behalf of the person by the person’s authorised representative.
The statutory declaration should include as much and as detailed information as possible relating to the abuse and to the person who allegedly suffered the abuse. While delegates can determine a claim with any amount of evidence before them, they are required to form a view of the value of the evidence before them. The statutory declaration should include if possible:
1. the person’s history of employment in Defence, both before and after the incident/s of abuse;
2. the details of the abuse incident/s, including
a) the date of occurrence of the incident/s. While it may not always be possible to provide an exact date, as detailed information as possible should be provided.
b) the position/role of the person at the time of the incident/s
c) where the person was employed/serving/deployed at the time of incident/s
d) where the alleged abuse occurred
e) a description of the circumstances of the abuse incident/s, including who initiated or effected the abuse and the names and/or ranks/roles of witnesses or third parties.
f) information about any connection between the alleged abuse and the person’s employment in Defence; and
3. Information about when, how and to whom any written or verbal report or complaint was made. Any resultant actions taken in regard to, or outcome of, such a report or complaint should also be included.
Corroborative evidence
It is not unusual for recall to be affected by traumatic events, and accounts of deeply personal events such as abuse may change over time either as details are repressed or remembered and as the victim develops a trusting relationship with the claims assessors. This should be taken into account when considering potential issues of ‘credibility’, where contentions change or do not match earlier statements.
Where a delegate requires further corroborative evidence to be satisfied to the requisite standard of the fact of an abuse event, the scope of what they may consider is broad. Delegates have wide discretion and may weigh or discount the significance of particular items of evidence in accordance with their own judgement and reason.
These considerations mean it is impossible to provide an exhaustive list of what may constitute corroborative evidence. Depending on the circumstances, examples may include contemporaneous reports, eyewitness statements, Defence investigations and information about abuse ‘clusters’ identified by the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce.
Contradictory evidence
Delegates are required to investigate the circumstances of every claim. This includes finding and considering all relevant evidence when determining a claim.
In this investigation, evidence may be found that contradicts the contentions made in a statutory declaration (such as, but not limited to, evidence that the alleged perpetrator or victim were not present at the location and time the abuse was said to have occurred). In these situations, the delegate must make a determination based on all evidence at his or her disposal. If the delegate is not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the contentions outlined in the statutory declaration establish the fact of abuse, given the contradictory evidence available, the claimant can be invited to provide further evidence and clarification or the claim can be rejected.
Sensitivity
Claims relating to sexual and physical abuse involve matters that can be distressing to recount and address. Delegates dealing with such claims must do so in a sensitive and careful manner. It is crucial that the privacy of claimants is upheld throughout the claims process.
Notice of Injury
The Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 and its predecessors (but not the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 or the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004) require an employee to give notice in writing of an injury or loss of property as soon as practicable after the employee becomes aware of the injury and provide that the Act does not apply in relation to the injury or loss if this requirement is not met.
Under the new policy, delegates must always treat claims involving allegations of sexual and physical abuse as if proper notice has been given.
For more information, see http://clik.dva.gov.au/military-compensation-srca-manuals-and-resources-library/liability-handbook/ch-5-notice-injury-and-claims-compensation/51-notice-and-claim-requirements [2].
Useful Links
Department of Defence: Pathways to Change- Evolving Defence Culture
http://www.defence.gov.au/pathwaytochange/ [3]
Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse
http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/ [4]
Defence Abuse Response Taskforce http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/Government_response_to_the_Defence_Abuse_Response_Taskforce_DART [5]
Defence Force Ombudsman – Reporting Abuse in the ADF
http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/about/australian-defence-force/reporting-abuse-in-defence [6]
Understanding the Impacts of Abuse in the Military
Note
This document was developed by Phoenix Australia - Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health for the Department of Veterans’ Affairs to support training on Understanding the Impacts of Sexual and Physical Abuse in the Military.
Disclaimer and copyright
The views and recommendations provided in this document are solely those of the consultants, Phoenix Australia - Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Australian Government.
The information provided in this manual and all related training are intended for information purposes only. The information provided by Phoenix Australia does not replace sound judgment and decision making.
While every reasonable effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information in this resource, no guarantee can be given that the information is free from error or omission. Phoenix Australia, its employees and agents, shall accept no liability for any act or omission occurring from reliance on the information provided, or for any consequences of any such act or omission. Phoenix Australia does not accept any liability for any injury, loss or damage incurred by use of or reliance on the information. Such damages include, without limitation, direct, indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages.
All information and materials produced by Phoenix Australia for the Department of Veterans’ Affairs are protected by copyright.
For reproduction or publication beyond that permitted by the Copyright Act 1968, permission should be sought in writing from the Department of Veterans’ Affairs.
Any reproduction permitted by the Department must acknowledge the Department of Veterans’ Affairs and Phoenix Australia as the source of any selected passage, extract, diagram or other information or material reproduced and must include a copy of the original copyright and disclaimer notices as set out here.
Referral Options
Sexual Assault Services:
1800RESPECT, the national sexual assault and domestic violence counselling service has a dedicated helpline and list sexual assault services on its website: https://www.1800respect.org.au/ [8]
The Veterans and Veterans’ Families Counselling Service:
The VVCS can be contacted on 1800 011 046.
Understanding Abuse
Physical or sexual abuse in the military can take on many different forms. It may be a single event such as a one off sexual assault, or include a series of assaults, threats or humiliation over an extended period. For example, a recruit could be selected for humiliating tasks and be physically or sexually assaulted on a number of occasions during his or her training as part of a bastardisation process.
Abuse doesn’t always involve direct physical or sexual assault:
Abuse can involve intimidation and control by the perpetrator(s), which can be ongoing and subtle in nature, and survivors are often “tuned in” to behaviours that may seem benign to others but are associated with potential harm for the survivor. For example, a survivor of sexual assault may be threatened and humiliated through text messages with seemingly innocuous flirtatious content sent by a perpetrator. A survivor of physical and emotional abuse can be kept silent and made to feel unworthy by being constantly singled out for criticism and disciplinary action. The use of intimidation and control can lead to difficulties disclosing the abuse to others. Threats and pressure for secrecy can also lead to long-standing fear and safety concerns for survivors, and can compound any distress or mental health issues caused by the abuse.
Abuse may also include being made to witness or participate in the abuse of others. Forcible participation or being made to witness the humiliation and sexual assault of a colleague can be very distressing and can lead in some instances to long-term mental health issues.
The circumstances in which abuse occurs in the military vary, however it most commonly falls into one of two categories:
Peer to peer abuse: In this form of abuse, both perpetrator and survivor are commonly in their 20s and junior in rank, and are usually acquaintances or co-workers. Alcohol is often a contributing factor in these situations. An example of this type of abuse was the 2011 Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) Skype incident when a cadet secretly filmed himself having sex with a female cadet and broadcast it via Skype to his colleagues.
Systematic abuse: Abuse can also be systemic and be either perpetrated or condoned by people in positions of authority, or in the case of the military, by people of higher rank. This form of abuse can happen in the context of bastardisation. For example, between 1960 and 1984 some recruits at HMAS Leeuwin were exposed to a culture of bullying and bastardisation that in some cases included rape, and other forms of sexual assault and abuse.
Saying “no”: defining lack of consent in sexual assault
Sexual assault happens when a person is forced, threatened or manipulated into sexual contact without his or her consent.
Consent is affected by:
use or threat of force
other threats and forms of coercion (e.g. threat to career, threat to being isolated from others or singled out for humiliation)
incapacitation: Alcohol consumption or use of other drugs can render a person incapable of giving consent. Alcohol and drugs can be deliberately used as a way of targeting a potential victim and are often used by perpetrators to excuse their actions.
age: Although the age of consent in most states is now 16, the difference in age between perpetrator and survivor and the role the perpetrator has in the survivor’s life also has an impact on a young person’s ability to consent. If a person is significantly older than the young person (usually 5 years or more) or if they are in a position of trust or authority over the young person (e.g. an instructor, a doctor or commander), they will be in a position to manipulate, dominate or control the young person and therefore take away their consent.
It is important to understand that consent can be withdrawn at any time, and that previous sexual contact or consent does not mean continued consent. For example, an existing sexual relationship does not necessarily imply consent. A person can also consent to one form of sexual contact (e.g. kissing) but not another (e.g. intercourse).
What promotes ongoing abuse in an organisation?
Abuse is common in Australia with 1 in 5 women and 1 in 22 men having experienced sexual assault in their lifetime. One in 3 women and 1 in 2 men have experienced physical violence during their lifetime. As illustrated by cases presented at the Royal Commission into Institutional Abuse, organisations can perpetuate the risk of abuse though their organisational culture, their processes or people. Many of the following factors are associated with higher risks of abuse within society generally, but they manifest in particular ways in the military:
Minority groups may be at risk because they are not accepted as part of the majority group. The military has traditionally been a male dominated environment with individuals such as women and people from the LGBTI community in the minority and therefore more susceptible to abuse.
When people are in positions of power, it is easier for them to commit abuse if they choose to do so. For this reason, organisations with a strong hierarchical structure, such as the military command structure, are environments where the risk of abuse needs to be managed. For example, the command structure can be used by some perpetrators to “groom” (in other words, manipulate) or threaten potential victims.
A belief that there will be no adverse consequences for abuse increases the likelihood of a person committing abuse. A strong sense of group belonging and strict hierarchy, as can be seen in the military, can discourage reporting of abuse, and create a culture of silence.
In groups and/or units where bullying and bastardisation are seen as legitimate tools to instigate group belonging and identification, abuse can be normalised, and therefore more frequent.
Importantly, organisational cultures and processes evolve over time, so it is important to understand the context of the abuse at the time it occurred. For example, notions of hierarchy and discipline, and practices to enforce them have changed in the military over time. In addition, different parts of the military have distinct cultures and approaches, which may lead to different risk levels and influence the experiences of survivors both during and following the abuse.
The following table presents a range of myths and facts about the reasons why abuse can occur in an organisation.
Myths | Facts |
|
|
It is not unusual for people to disclose abuse many months or years after it has occurred. Many never disclose what happened to them at all. There is a range of reasons why people fear reporting abuse including:
Guilt and shame. For example, in our society the stigma associated with being sexually assaulted is high. It is not unusual for survivors to be blamed and for the assault to be minimised. Survivors often take on this blame and feel shame for what has been done to them.
Depression and feelings of helplessness. It takes a self-belief and motivation to disclose. Feeling flat and depressed can take that motivation away.
Fear of re-experiencing the abuse (through images of abuse/nightmares). People who have been abused are often afraid of talking about what happened to them because this can lead to extreme distress and vivid memories that are hard to bear.
Fear of reprisal by perpetrator or others in power
Negative experiences of reporting. In Australia, many people who experience abuse receive little support. In the military, a large percentage of Defence members and veterans who have received reparation through the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce (DART) did so because of reported Defence mismanagement. Some survivors do not report the abuse because they fear that nothing will be done.
Fear of being given a negative label. For example some heterosexual men who have been sexually assaulted by another man may fear being seen as a homosexual; often people who have experienced abuse are afraid that they will be seen as “weak” or “damaged”.
Fear of being judged for their perceived role in abuse. Survivors often judge their own behaviour during the abuse harshly and fear that others will do the same. For example, if a person had too much to drink before being assaulted, they may fear that others will think the assault is their fault because they were drinking.
Fear of being judged if experience of abuse included being made to witness or participate in abuse of others. Reports to the Royal Commission and the DART include instances where some survivors of abuse were also made to participate in, or to witness, abuse of others. Some survivors may feel they ‘deserved’ their own abuse because they did not refuse to witness others’ abuse, irrespective of whether they were in a position to refuse.
People who have experienced abuse in the military do not report the abuse for many of the same reasons as civilian survivors; however, there are additional reasons why it is difficult to disclose:
Perpetrator(s) will often be from the person’s workplace or in command. The perpetrators may not have been discharged, and therefore may cross paths with the survivor throughout their career.
In the military, there is less separation between a person’s private and professional lives. A person may see their abuser at work, at their living quarters or have them associated with their social circle. For many survivors who live on base or mostly socialise with colleagues, it can be very difficult to be away from the abuser.
Given that strength and resilience are highly valued in the military, some survivors fear that others will find out about the abuse and that they will be perceived as weak and unable to accomplish what is required for their role or a mission.
Many fear that knowledge of the abuse and its impacts will reduce the likelihood of promotion or deployment, or lead to separation from the military.
The reactions to abuse and the coping strategies survivors use vary greatly from person to person. However, there are some common responses across different types of traumatic experiences. Being familiar with these reactions can help you better manage your interaction with clients.
Abuse can have a profound impact on how a person feels about himself or herself and sees the world. Common experiences include:
Guilt and Shame Many survivors feel that the abuse or assault was their fault. This is often reinforced by how others respond to their experience. Survivors can come to believe that they are weak, bad, dirty, or permanently damaged by what happened to them.
Trust Abuse is a betrayal of trust. This is especially the case if the survivor knows the perpetrator. Survivors can also start questioning why the abuse happened to them and blaming themselves. As a result, many survivors find it difficult to trust other people and themselves.
Safety A person’s sense of safety at work, in their home, community or the world may be deeply shaken or disappear entirely. They may feel as though something bad could happen at any time.
Control Sexual and physical abuse takes away a sense of control. Some survivors feel helpless, as though there is nothing they can do to improve their situations. Others react badly to those whom they perceive as having control over them. They can become withdrawn, fearful or aggressive.
Reliving the event Survivors may experience unwanted and intrusive memories, vivid nightmares and flashbacks, and intense reactions (like strong feelings and physical sensations) when reminded of the trauma.
Feeling wound up and on edge Survivors may have difficulty sleeping or concentrating. They may also feel angry and irritable, and take more risks. It is also not unusual for survivors to be easily startled and constantly ‘on guard’ for danger.
Avoidance of reminders of the trauma It is common for survivors to avoid activities, places, people and thoughts that bring back memories of the trauma. These reminders can also include objects, physical sensations, smells and sounds. In order to cope, people often use a range of strategies to avoid distressing feelings and reminders of the trauma, including using drugs and alcohol, gambling or withdrawing from usual activities and people that would normally provide them with support. These strategies can lead to long-term problems and can get in the way of recovery.
Other negative consequences In addition to guilt, shame and anger, survivors may feel flat, and lose interest in day-to-day activities. They may also feel isolated and cut off from friends and family. Over time, other issues may emerge such as depression, sexual difficulties, substance abuse, eating disorders, self-harm, and suicidality.
In the case of repeated abuse and trauma occurring early in life, survivors may experience more pervasive and complex problems such as:
Difficulty managing emotions including recognising emotions, having extreme emotional reactions such as rage or shame or despair, having difficulties in changing feelings, and taking a long time for unpleasant feelings to settle.
Impulsive, self-destructive behaviour like excessive risk taking, or having frequent thoughts of suicide and self-harm.
Difficulties with relationships like having difficulty trusting people, feeling hostile and separate from others, and having difficulty establishing or maintaining safe relationships.
Responses to abuse vary People can react very differently to a traumatic event. Some people will be quite distressed initially but then bounce back quickly and return to their usual level of functioning. Others may appear largely unaffected at first, but then go on to experience difficulties later. While many people recover after experiencing a traumatic event, the experience of trauma can elevate the risk of experiencing serious mental health problems. This is particularly the case with trauma that involves violence experienced at the hands of another person. Mental health problems commonly experienced by survivors of abuse include depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and drug or alcohol abuse.
Impacts of trauma in their own words…
…on relationships
“I don’t trust anyone… I feel like there’s just no point, because they’re just going to hurt me anyway.”
…on feelings
“Something affects my mood to a point where it intensifies, and once it hits a certain threshold, I just shut down and I just stop responding.”
…on taking risks
“Hanging out with the wrong people, going into the wrong areas, not really thinking about it; thinking, what’s the worst that can happen? When I’ve actually thought about it, it’s a really stupid idea … I think it is connected to what I’ve been through when I was younger because it, it just makes me so desensitised to everything.”
…on unhelpful ways of viewing self
“I’m not good enough … that I’m pathetic and worthless, that I’m a freak, that I’ll amount to nothing, that this is what my life is meant to be like.”
Case studies
Below are two examples of people who have experienced abuse in the military and have contacted DVA to seek compensation[1] [13]. These case studies illustrate different types of abuse and their impacts.
Case study 1-Tom
Tom rings DVA to investigate how he could get compensated for sexual abuse that occurred during his apprenticeship in the Navy the late 1950’s. He has recently attended a VVCS Lifestyle course with his wife where he disclosed the abuse for the first time. The support he received from his wife and other course participants has encouraged him to come forward with his story. He rings stating he would like “justice” for what happened to him but that he doesn’t “trust DVA”. He has been involved with the VVAA but has not talked to an advocate about contacting DVA about the sexual abuse.
Tom was in the Navy for a little over 20 years, and was deployed during the Vietnam War. Tom was sexually abused as part of the bastardisation process when he first joined the Navy (at the age of 17). The abuse consisted of being asked to masturbate in front of other sailors and senior officers and being raped over a number of months by older sailors and officers. Tom was discharged from the Navy in the 1970s on medical grounds. Tom has a TPI pension, and has been diagnosed with PTSD and Alcohol Dependence. He reports that he had a negative experience while first lodging his claims for war-related PTSD with DVA and is still angry about how he was treated. He is constantly fearful about losing his TPI entitlement.
Tom has a history of heavy drinking but has cut down since he started seeing a counsellor at VVCS two months ago. He still binges at least twice a week, usually on weekends with friends. He still experiences some of his PTSD symptoms but now reports having “fewer nightmares and panic attacks”. He feels like he has lost his sense of purpose since he left the Navy but at the same time harbours a lot of resentment about what was done to him when he first joined. He was diagnosed with PTSD because of his experiences on a ship ferrying troops to Vietnam. However, he now reports that he also has had nightmares and intrusive thoughts about being sexually assaulted during his first months in the Navy.
Case study 2 - Stacey
Stacey rings DVA to investigate how DVA could compensate her and help her access support regarding a sexual assault that happened to her while she was deployed in Timor. She has never contacted DVA before despite hearing information about what the Department had to offer during a transition seminar she attended. She has a very hazy memory of the information provided during the seminar.
Stacey was in the Army for two years before being deployed to Timor where she was exposed for the first time to large-scale poverty. She was also sexually assaulted by a colleague during that time. She stated that she knew the perpetrator well and had briefly dated him a year and a half prior to the assault. She did not report the assault right away because she felt “confused and ashamed” about what had happened and feared that no one would believe her. She only reported what happened when she came back to Australia and discovered that the perpetrator was telling colleagues that she was a “slut” and “had it coming”. She felt that Command took her complaint seriously and helped her seek appropriate support. However, she did not end up pressing charges with police as she was “not coping at the time”. She was discharged from the army on medical grounds shortly after making the complaint and was diagnosed with Depression at the time.
She experiences intrusive images of the assault on a daily basis. She often feels scared when walking alone at night and finds herself constantly “looking over her shoulder” for a potential attacker. Her memories of Timor include feeling useful and proud on occasions, but also helpless much of the time. She feels deeply ashamed when recalling the assault and feels that she should have done more to stop it and questions herself constantly about not reporting it right away.
Stacey stated: “For a long time I thought I deserved the treatment I got because I had come into a male domain. The way you ended up feeling a lot of the time was, “They did not invite me in. I invited myself”.
Stacey is currently unemployed and reports feeling “tense and teary most of the time”. She is on antidepressants but no longer sees a therapist. She has great difficulties talking about what has happened to her and fears how this will impact on her mood.
[1] [14] Information used in the case studies is based on typical DVA client presentations but does not refer to actual people. Any similarities with a current or former DVA client is therefore purely coincidental.
When a current serving member or veteran contacts DVA, the impacts of abuse on their memory and emotions may significantly influence their ability to engage with support provision and the compensation process. The client’s previous experience of help seeking will also influence how they interact with DVA staff.
The impact of memory and distress related to trauma
Distress associated with remembering the abuse can lead to clients providing limited details about what happened to them in impact statements, statutory declarations and psychiatric assessments. It can also lead to clients becoming obviously distressed or angry when they are asked to recount what happened to them. Commonly, remembering the abuse can result in the shutting down of emotions - in that case a client’s presentation of what happened to him or her can appear detached and perfunctory.
Sometimes, the distress at the time of the abuse impacts on a person’s ability to recall events accurately. It is not unusual for memories of traumatic events to be fragmented and chaotic. This can impact upon a client’s credibility as he or she may not be able to present a coherent narrative of the abuse and its impact.
In general, if a person is distressed or has a mental health disorder such as depression, alcohol dependence or PTSD, their ability to concentrate and remember events and conversations will be limited. Clients may not remember instructions or processes because of this and may appear chaotic or uncooperative as a result.
The impact of stigma and emotions
People who have been abused have had their sense of safety and trust in other people taken away. Victim blaming by the community, family members or professionals (e.g. ‘why didn’t she leave the ADF?’) can compound a survivor’s lack of trust in others. This can mean that trusting service providers, particularly those they perceive to have authority or power over their life is difficult. If you are in a position in which you can assess someone, or are seen to facilitate a process that will determine his or her future, you are in a position of power and that can be frightening for many clients. Many people deal with loss of trust and fear by becoming suspicious, withdrawing or becoming angry and aggressive. This can lead to confrontational behaviour or avoiding engaging with service providers (e.g. not returning phone calls; not opening mail; shouting or threatening).
Strong emotions that result from having experienced abuse can also get in the way of having a positive relationship with service providers. Many clients will have difficulty containing anxiety and or anger. Often, they will deal these emotions by avoiding them. This again may lead to not returning phone calls, not filling in paper work or not turning up to appointments.
Links
[1] https://clik.dva.gov.au/user/login?destination=comment/reply/18958%23comment-form
[2] https://clik.dva.gov.au/military-compensation-srca-manuals-and-resources-library/liability-handbook/ch-5-notice-injury-and-claims-compensation/51-notice-and-claim-requirements
[3] http://www.defence.gov.au/pathwaytochange/
[4] http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/
[5] http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/Government_response_to_the_Defence_Abuse_Response_Taskforce_DART
[6] http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/about/australian-defence-force/reporting-abuse-in-defence
[7] https://clik.dva.gov.au/user/login?destination=comment/reply/81295%23comment-form
[8] https://www.1800respect.org.au/
[9] https://clik.dva.gov.au/user/login?destination=comment/reply/81297%23comment-form
[10] https://clik.dva.gov.au/user/login?destination=comment/reply/81298%23comment-form
[11] https://clik.dva.gov.au/user/login?destination=comment/reply/81299%23comment-form
[12] https://clik.dva.gov.au/user/login?destination=comment/reply/81300%23comment-form
[13] https://clik.dva.gov.au/#_ftn1
[14] https://clik.dva.gov.au/#_ftnref1
[15] https://clik.dva.gov.au/user/login?destination=comment/reply/81301%23comment-form