“Please save my life… I’m frightened.” - October 2021

 A point where isolation starts feeling dangerous.

There is a point where isolation stops feeling quiet...and starts feeling dangerous

There is a particular kind of fear that doesn’t come from a single event.

It builds quietly at first.

Then all at once.

When it reaches its peak, it no longer feels like a workplace issue, or a complaint, or even a legal matter.

It feels like survival.

⸻

I reached that point when the very system that was supposed to help me — the complaints process, the regulators, the oversight bodies — became part of the harm.

The turning point for me was the way my complaint was handled by IRO.

What should have been a safeguard became something else entirely.

Instead of support, I experienced responses that escalated my distress.

Instead of clarity, I was left more confused.

Instead of protection, I felt exposed.

At a time when I was already psychologically vulnerable, trying to navigate serious workplace harm and statutory non-compliance, the handling of my complaint didn’t just fail to help — it intensified everything.

I wasn’t just dealing with the original harm anymore.

I was dealing with the system itself.

⸻

Escalating Fear

There are moments captured in my own words that I can barely read back now.

“Today I’m paralysed with fear.”  

That wasn’t dramatic language.

That was reality.

The situation had reached a point where every interaction felt unpredictable.

Every response carried risk.

Every silence felt like something worse was coming.

I described it at the time as a “psychological thriller.”

And that’s exactly what it felt like.

⸻

Reaching Out — To Anyone, Anywhere

When people are safe, they follow process.

When people are not safe, they reach for help wherever they can find it.

By that point, I had exhausted the formal channels.

So I did something I never thought I would do.

I started reaching out to anyone I could think of.

My local electorate office in Kogarah.

Members of Parliament.

Community organisations.

Even my neighbours.

“I’ve started sharing the truth with our Kogarah electorate residents…”  

That wasn’t strategy.

That was desperation.

⸻

Grabbing at Straws

There is a moment in trauma where logic gives way to hope.

The Vice-Chancellor had already been put on notice multiple times.

He is Slovenian.

So I reached out to the Slovenian community.

Not because it made procedural sense.

But because I was trying to find a pathway to humanity.

⸻

What Desperation Actually Looks Like

People often misunderstand desperation.

It looks like persistence.

Relentless, exhausting persistence.

It looks like sending emails late at night.

Making calls while shaking.

Explaining your story over and over again, hoping this time someone will listen.

It looks like trying to hold your life together while everything that gave it stability is being stripped away.

Your work.

Your income.

Your sense of safety.

Your future.

Your home.

⸻

When Those Words Became Real

At some point, everything condenses into a single moment.

A single sentence.

“Please save my life… I’m frightened.”  

No one writes that lightly.

No one says that unless something has gone very, very wrong.

⸻

When the System Doesn’t Intervene

The most frightening part of all of this wasn’t just the original harm.

It was what followed.

The absence of intervention.

The deflection between agencies.

The failure to enforce what should have been enforced.

At one point, even an IRO communication caused harm that reverberated into my family, leaving me “alone and frightened again.”  

That is what systemic failure looks like.

⸻

Legal Framing — Quietly, But Clearly

This is not only a personal account of distress.

It raises serious questions about statutory purpose and administrative responsibility.

Within the NSW workers compensation framework, bodies like IRO exist to support and protect injured workers navigating a complex statutory scheme.

Where conduct instead contributes to harm or escalation of distress, the issue becomes whether:

• the protective purpose of the scheme has been undermined

• the response reflects legal unreasonableness in the face of clear vulnerability

• or there has been, in practical terms, a failure to exercise the protective function required by the scheme

This is about whether a system designed to protect can, in effect, become part of the harm.

My case proves it can and does, in a serious way. 

⸻

A Real-Life Psychological Thriller

When I described my experience as a “psychological thriller,” it wasn’t hyperbole.

It was the closest language I had.

Repeated harm.

Escalating fear.

Isolation.

Betrayal.

All while trying to navigate systems that were supposed to protect you.

⸻

Why I’m Telling This Story

Because no one should have to reach the point where they are contacting anyone — community groups, politicians, strangers — just to feel safe.

Because no one should have to beg for intervention.

Because silence allows this to continue.

⸻

A Call for Humanity

At the centre of all of this is something very simple.

Humanity.

When someone is telling you they are frightened, you don’t redirect them.

You act.

⸻

And When No One Acts

You start reaching.

To anyone.

Anywhere.

Hoping that somewhere, somehow, a human response will break through.

⸻

A Call to Accountability

This is no longer just a personal story.

It is a matter of accountability.

When a worker raises safety concerns,

when a compensation claim is made,

when distress is clearly communicated —

the law does not permit silence, delay, or harm in response.

The framework exists for a reason.

To protect.

To intervene.

To prevent further injury.

Where that does not occur — where harm is allowed to continue, or is compounded by those entrusted to prevent it — serious questions arise about responsibility, oversight, and compliance with statutory obligations.

This includes:

• whether protective mechanisms were properly activated

• whether complaints were handled in a manner consistent with their purpose

• whether decision-makers engaged with the substance of the material before them

At its highest, a failure to properly engage with relevant evidence and the protective purpose of the scheme may constitute jurisdictional error, or legal unreasonableness.

Because at its core, this is simple:

A system designed to protect cannot be allowed to become a source of harm.

And when it does,

it must be examined,

it must be acknowledged,

and it must be corrected.

Not eventually.

Now.

⸻

Source: contemporaneous record of events - Documents 207-208

Red Flags Checklist - Early Warning Signs in a Workers Compensation Claim

If you notice more than one of these early on, pause.

They are not normal delays — they are signals.

 

These are not minor issues. These are early warning signs of systemic failure. 

1. Communication Red Flags

☐ Emails go unanswered for weeks

☐ Responses arrive vague, partial, or off-point

☐ You are told “we’ll explain this over the phone” instead of receiving written answers

☐ Different people give you different explanations

☐ You are repeatedly asked for information already provided

What it means: accountability is being diluted.

⸻

2. Case Manager Red Flags

☐ You don’t know who your case manager is

☐ Your case manager leaves and no replacement is assigned

☐ Messages are redirected endlessly

☐ You are told “anyone can help you”

☐ No one appears responsible for next steps

Key warning: a claim without a case manager is a claim without ownership.

⸻

3. Process & Transparency Red Flags

☐ Decisions are implied but not confirmed in writing

☐ Timeframes are unclear or keep shifting

☐ You are told “the process hasn’t started yet” months into a claim

☐ You discover forms or steps you should have been told about earlier

☐ Important actions occur without your involvement

What it means: process is being used to obscure responsibility.

⸻

4. Medical & Recovery Red Flags

☐ Treating doctors’ reports are ignored

☐ Further IMEs are scheduled without clear reasons

☐ Return-to-work planning never begins

☐ No rehabilitation provider is engaged

☐ Your health worsens while the system delays

Critical: the system has a duty not to cause further harm.

⸻

5. Oversight & Complaint Red Flags

☐ Complaints are acknowledged but not resolved

☐ Responses avoid answering direct questions

☐ You receive phone calls instead of written explanations

☐ Oversight bodies defer repeatedly to the insurer

☐ Time passes while nothing changes

This is secondary harm — injury caused by the system itself.

⸻

6. Psychological Red Flags (Often Dismissed — But Vital)

☐ You feel confused after interactions

☐ You start doubting your memory or judgement

☐ You feel anxious every time you check email

☐ You’re told you’re “difficult” for asking questions

☐ The process itself is worsening your symptoms

Trust this signal. Distress is data.

⸻

If You’re Ticking Boxes — What to Do Early

You do not need to do everything. Choose one step at a time.

✔ Ask for responses in writing

✔ Name gaps clearly (e.g. “I do not have an assigned case manager”)

✔ Keep your own simple timeline

✔ Follow verbal conversations with a summary email

✔ Seek independent support early (advocacy, trusted professionals)

⸻

Most Important Reminder

These red flags are systemic patterns, not personal failures.

You are not:

• unreasonable

• impatient

• overreacting

• asking for too much

You are noticing what many injured workers only see later — after the damage deepens.

Early recognition is self-protection.

The Harm of Unwritten Processes

There is a quiet danger inside many institutions — one that rarely appears in policies, flowcharts, or public statements.

It is the reliance on unwritten processes.

Phone calls instead of emails.

“Verbal explanations” instead of written reasons.

Assurances given off the record.

Decisions implied, but never documented.

For injured workers and vulnerable people, unwritten processes are not neutral.

They are harmful.

——

What Is an Unwritten Process?

An unwritten process is any decision, explanation, or action that:

• is communicated verbally rather than in writing

• cannot be reviewed, verified, or challenged

• leaves no paper trail

• shifts accountability away from the decision-maker

It often sounds reasonable at first:

“We’ll just explain this over the phone.”

“There’s no need to put that in writing.”

“It’s easier if I talk you through it.”

But when power is unequal — as it is between institutions and individuals — unwritten processes protect the system, not the person.

If it's not written down, it's harder to challenge - and easier to deny.

——

Why Institutions Prefer Them

Unwritten processes offer flexibility to institutions.

They allow:

• inconsistency without evidence

• delay without consequence

• denial without trace

• decisions to be reframed later

They reduce risk for organisations by increasing risk for individuals.

What cannot be written down cannot easily be scrutinised.

——

Why They Are Especially Harmful to Injured Workers

Injured workers are already navigating:

• illness or trauma

• financial stress

• complex systems

• power imbalances

When processes are unwritten, injured workers are forced to:

• rely on memory during periods of distress

• recount conversations they did not control

• prove what was said without evidence

• defend themselves against shifting narratives

This is not just unfair — it is destabilising.

Stress increases. Symptoms worsen. Trust erodes.

——

Unwritten Processes Enable Silence

One of the most damaging effects of unwritten processes is strategic silence.

When questions are answered verbally:

• there is no obligation to respond again

• there is no record of what was avoided

• follow-up becomes harder

• accountability dissolves

Silence can then be reframed as:

• misunderstanding

• miscommunication

• differing recollections

This leaves the injured person isolated, doubting themselves, and increasingly powerless.

That is GASLIGHTING. 

——

“We Called You” Is Not Accountability

A phone call is not transparency.

A phone call:

• cannot be reviewed

• cannot be forwarded

• cannot be relied upon later

• cannot protect you

When institutions choose calls over written responses, they retain control over the narrative.

You are left holding fragments. They hold the authority.

——

The Psychological Harm Is Real

Unwritten processes cause secondary harm — harm created by the system itself.

They lead to:

• heightened anxiety

• loss of confidence

• hypervigilance

• exhaustion

• a sense of being gaslit

People begin asking:

• “Did I misunderstand?”

• “Did they really say that?”

• “Why can’t I get a straight answer?”

When your health depends on clarity, ambiguity is dangerous.

——

Written Processes Are a Safety Measure

Written processes are not bureaucracy for its own sake.

They are a safeguard.

They:

• slow decisions down

• force clarity

• create accountability

• protect both parties

• allow review and correction

For injured workers, written communication is often the only stable ground in an unstable time.

——

When You Force It Into Writing — What Changes

There is a reason unwritten processes are preferred.

Because the moment you insist on written answers, everything changes.

In my case, after months of phone calls, partial explanations, and responses being relayed verbally through an IRO Dispute Resolution Officer, I made a deliberate decision:

I would no longer accept answers that were not documented.

The process involved the IRO Dispute Resolution Officer calling me to relay the insurer’s responses, rather than those responses being provided directly in writing.

That meant:

• no verifiable record

• no ability to review what was said

• no way to challenge inconsistencies

So I escalated — specifically to require written responses.

https://mystory-myvoice.blogspot.com/2026/04/i-demanded-answers-in-writing-iro.html?m=1

And once everything was forced into writing, something shifted.

What had been vague became explicit.

What had been avoidable became recorded.

What could be denied became evidence.

When required to respond in writing, conduct did not suddenly become compliant — it became defensive. Positions were taken that are now permanently on record.

That is the risk of written processes for institutions.

And the protection of written processes for individuals.

——

Other Examples of Unwritten Processes

This pattern did not occur in isolation.

The Unminuted “Dispute Resolution” Meeting

On 9 March 2020, a formal “dispute resolution” meeting took place involving senior HR leadership, an Associate Director of HR, and legal representation.

No minutes were taken.

In a process of that nature, the absence of minutes removes the record, the accountability, and the ability to verify what occurred.

https://mystory-myvoice.blogspot.com/2025/02/introducing-corporate-psychopath.html?m=0

⸻

Verbal Direction and HR Filtering

In early January 2020, a key workplace conversation shifted in real time — with responses shaped through HR involvement.

None of it was documented.

No written confirmation.

No record of advice.

No accountability.

(I’m not re-sharing the links again. It’s too re-traumatising. The posts are emotionally charged, because going through the relevant documents to write the posts had me relive the harm on record. But my story has become so serious regarding systemic failure and maladministration, it must be shared, not only as part of my healing process, but for accountability and to stop such systemic failure from harming other workers and families. 

Readers can view these incidents on my blog under Associate director unfit to do the inherent requirements of the job, Parts 1 & 2, written in February 2025). 

⸻

Why This Matters

When processes are not written down:

• responsibility becomes unclear

• facts become contestable

• narratives can shift

• the burden shifts to the injured person

But when things are written:

• inconsistencies are exposed

• patterns become visible

• accountability has somewhere to attach

This is about protection.

⸻

Final Word: Where Silence Ends and Evidence Begins

Unwritten processes are not administrative shortcuts — they are where accountability disappears.

If it isn’t written down, it can be denied. If it can be denied, it can be repeated.

That is how harm continues.

So ask for it in writing - because the moment it is written down, it stops being a story — and becomes evidence.

⸻

A Broader Pattern — Still Unfolding

What began as a workplace issue did not end within the workplace.

When I escalated for help — including to my local electorate office in Kogarah — I encountered the same pattern: verbal assurances, no written follow-up, and outcomes that did not reflect what had been said.

https://mystory-myvoice.blogspot.com/2026/03/chris-minns-and-kogarah-electorate.html?m=0

When viewed alongside what is documented, this raises serious questions about accountability and the systemic handling of injured workers across New South Wales.

The full account is still to come.

But the principle is clear:

Where matters affecting rights, safety, and public administration are handled without proper record, the risk of jurisdictional error becomes embedded in the process itself.