“Please Don’t Neglect Us”: What I Asked of SIRA NSW — In My Own Words - June 2021

When my matter was escalated, at my demand, to the Enforcement & Prosecutions Unit of the NSW State Insurance Regulatory Authority, I did not write as a litigant trying to score points.

I wrote as a worker trying to survive a system that had already overwhelmed me.

The record matters because what I asked for was not extraordinary.

It was enforcement.

—

When a Regulator Says “We Acknowledge” — and Then Says “Not Our Jurisdiction”

In June 2021, I demanded that my complaint be escalated to the Enforcement & Prosecutions Unit of the State Insurance Regulatory Authority.

After two years of raising workplace health and safety concerns, navigating workers compensation disputes, and documenting alleged statutory non-compliance, I finally received formal acknowledgment that my material had been received, logged, and would be reviewed within 14 business days.

On paper, it looked like progress.

In reality, what followed exposed a deeper problem — the gap between acknowledgment and action, and the destabilising effect of jurisdictional withdrawal after escalation.

—

The Escalation and my Expectations 

On 31 May 2021, I was informed that my claim was recorded as “CLOSED – LIABILITY DENIED.”  

Within days, I:

• Sent 13 attachments by email

• Sent a USB of indexed records via registered post

• Left voicemail messages

• Requested enforcement of compliance by the insurer

• Raised concerns about a withheld IME report

• Asked for clarity about investigative steps and jurisdiction

On 21 June 2021, SIRA formally acknowledged receipt of:

• My 13-attachment email

• The registered USB

• My voicemail

• Further written correspondence

The matter was escalated to the Manager of Enforcement & Prosecutions, who confirmed four steps:

1. Review information on hand

2. Review material submitted

3. Identify applicable legislation within jurisdiction

4. Respond with an outcome

The timeframe: 14 business days.

That acknowledgment gave me something I hadn’t had in a long time — hope.

I wrote at the time:

“I need this to speed up to the Commission now, but balanced with ensuring a proper, legitimate and transparent investigation is conducted this time, with my evidence for true impartiality.”

I was not asking for preferential treatment.

I was asking for regulatory scrutiny.

—

What I Asked For — In My Own Words

On 20 June 2021, as my health deteriorated and financial pressure mounted, I wrote plainly:

“While the investigation progresses — I need support ASAP — it’s a matter of respect and human dignity.”

But the “support” I was requesting was not counselling.

It was enforcement.

“I need you to enforce compliance immediately by the insurer CC Insurance.”

And:

“I need you to enforce cooperation, collaboration and communication by employer and insurer immediately… Go straight to the VC and ensure HR are kept away from me, as you continue this investigation.”

I also wrote:

“Can you please advise me who I can send this entire file of records to, so I can finally have a legitimate and transparent investigation and my entitlements and rights that were stolen… assessed and accounted for.”

And, when the personal toll became unbearable:

“I’m alone and afraid and suffering financially.”

“Don’t neglect us until it’s too late. I’ve given you all the evidence, and annotated, to help you. Help me now too. Please.”

Those words are uncomfortable to revisit.

But they show exactly what I was seeking: lawful intervention while harm was ongoing.

—

The Parallel Track: The Personal Injury Commission

At the same time, my matter was proceeding before the Personal Injury Commission.

From a worker’s perspective, the system felt fragmented:

• The Commission handling dispute resolution.

• The regulator handling enforcement.

• Neither halting the deterioration in real time.

Procedural silos may make sense administratively.

They are devastating experientially.

—

The Jurisdiction Shift

After escalation, acknowledgment, and review undertakings, engagement shifted.

Calls did not occur.

Communication became indirect.

And ultimately, the position was communicated that my matter was not within SIRA’s jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction is not a casual word.

In administrative law, it defines authority.

But when:

• Evidence has been formally logged,

• The matter has been escalated internally,

• A review timeframe has been set,

a subsequent jurisdictional withdrawal — without detailed statutory reasoning — raises serious governance questions.

A regulator declining jurisdiction should provide:

1. Clear written reasons.

2. Specific legislative references.

3. Explanation of enforcement thresholds.

4. Identification of the body that does have authority.

5. Confirmation whether any aspect remains within scope.

Anything less creates opacity.

Opacity breeds suspicion.

These were not abstract complaints.

They were requests for regulatory intervention while harm was ongoing.

—

The Broader Question and Structural Issue

This is bigger than my case.

When a worker:

• Submits extensive documentary evidence,

• Is told their matter is escalated,

• Is given a review timeframe,

• Is actively deteriorating while waiting,

and then receives a jurisdictional distancing without transparent reasoning —

what safeguards ensure regulatory accountability?

• What interim protections exist when enforcement review is ongoing?

• Can regulators compel document production swiftly?

• Can they direct compliance during investigation?

• Should jurisdictional boundaries be explained transparently and promptly?

• How do we prevent “quiet exits” from enforcement scrutiny?

Regulatory legitimacy depends on visible, reasoned decision-making.

When a regulator later says a matter is outside jurisdiction — after reviewing evidence, escalating internally, and setting timelines — the human impact of that withdrawal is profound. 

Silence creates suspicion.

Ambiguity erodes trust.

Opacity damages credibility.

—

Referral Is Not Regulation

Alongside enforcement acknowledgment, I was provided:

• Psychologist contact details

• Financial counselling services

• Lifeline and Beyond Blue numbers

• Advice to contact my GP

Those services are essential in crisis contexts.

But I was not asking the regulator for emotional support.

I was asking it to regulate.

There is a fundamental difference.

When distress arises from alleged systemic non-compliance, the appropriate primary response is compliance action — not referral sheets.

Dignity is not a crisis hotline.

—

The Human Cost of Administrative Avoidance

I could have accepted a reasoned refusal.

I could have accepted statutory limits clearly explained.

What I struggled with was avoidance followed by withdrawal.

When someone writes:

“Help me now too. Please.”

and the system responds with distance rather than clarity, it compounds the harm.

—

Why This Matters

Many injured workers describe the same pattern:

1. Raise WHS concerns.

2. Injury occurs.

3. Compensation dispute follows.

4. Regulatory complaint is lodged.

5. Acknowledgment is issued.

6. Time passes.

7. The worker deteriorates.

The system may not intend harm. But if it cannot respond proportionately and transparently when harm is ongoing, reform is necessary.

Not optional.

—

Grounded Close

If you are navigating a similar regulatory maze:

Document everything.

Quote your own words.

Request written reasons.

Ask for statutory references.

Transparency is not hostility.

It is a basic requirement of lawful administration.

And dignity in law must show up in practice — especially when someone has already said, clearly and without theatrics:

“Don’t neglect us until it’s too late.”

Source: contemporaneous record of events - Document 173. 

—

Further reading 

Marschall, A. (2024, 12 December). ‘How Trauma-Informed Practices Can Create a Safe and Supportive Workplace.’ Spring Health. [Online blog]: https://www.springhealth.com/blog/how-trauma-informed-practices-can-create-a-safe-and-supportive-workplace   

In Memory of a Great Teacher: Legacy, Conscience, and Lent

This reflection includes themes of grief, faith, and institutional harm. It is offered gently, in the spirit of Lent.

On 4 February 2026, a highly respected and inspiring teacher from my high school, Mr Steve Donlan, passed away.

Like many former students of Bethany College, I received the news with deep sadness — and with gratitude. I’m grateful for the teachers who shaped not only my education, but my sense of dignity, responsibility, and hope for a life of service beyond the “safety” of school.

In a letter sent to Bethany families the following day, the College described Mr Donlan as “a passionate educator” whose impact on students over decades was “immeasurable.” He was remembered as a mentor, an advocate, and a pastoral presence for generations of young women — someone who gave generously of his time to ensure students’ needs were met, both academically and emotionally.

Those words are beautiful.

And they are true.

⸻

Part I — A Legacy Beyond the Classroom

At Bethany, teachers like Mr Donlan did more than teach subjects. They formed people.

They cultivated courage. They recognised potential and called it forward. They encouraged leadership, intellectual confidence, and moral seriousness. Students were guided to imagine lives shaped not by fear, but by service — lives grounded in conscience and the belief that education exists to uphold human dignity.

As a student, I was known affectionately by teachers as “St Vicki of Bourbous.” That nickname was not about piety. It reflected leadership, conviction, and a willingness to stand up for others. Those qualities were not accidental. They were patiently and deliberately nurtured by educators who believed in the inherent worth of the person before them.

Mr Donlan was part of that fabric.

His influence did not end at graduation. Some of the students he once taught went on to become teachers themselves. Some returned to schools like Bethany as early-career educators — guided, mentored, and supported by people like him. His legacy lived on not only in students, but in the teachers he helped form.

This is the quiet, enduring power of a great educator: a life that continues to shape others long after the classroom door has closed.

⸻

Part II — Lent, Conscience, and the Demands of Justice

This loss has compelled a deeper examination of conscience.

For more than two decades, my adult life has been devoted to Catholic education and higher education. As an academic librarian, I served clients in the Schools of Educational Leadership and Education, supporting the formation of future teachers, principals, and religious educators — many of whom would go on to serve in Catholic and other Christian schools. My family’s relationship with Catholic education spans decades and has long been characterised by service, trust, and mutual respect.

It is precisely because of this history that the moral dissonance I now experience cannot be ignored.

The Catholic tradition teaches that institutions, no less than individuals, are bound by moral law. 

Catholic social teaching affirms the inherent dignity of every person, the preferential protection of the vulnerable, the primacy of conscience, and the obligation of justice — not only in intention, but in action.

Where harm has occurred, the Church’s own teaching is clear:

justice requires truth, accountability, and restitution.

Words alone are insufficient.

Lent is not a symbolic season.

It is a call to conversion.

It asks whether power has been exercised in fidelity to the Gospel, or whether institutional self-protection has displaced moral responsibility. It asks whether systems intended to serve the common good have instead caused harm — and whether those with authority are willing to name that harm honestly.

In my lived experience, actions taken by Catholic institutions fell gravely short of the values they professed to teach. The impact on my life and on my family was profound. I state this not to inflame, but to bear truthful witness — because silence in the face of injustice is itself a moral failure.

The Catechism reminds us that theft is not limited to material property alone, and that restitution is an obligation of justice, not charity. Where dignity has been stripped away, repair is not optional. Without repair, there can be no genuine reconciliation.

As the Church enters the Lenten journey, this moment demands more than reflection. It demands moral courage. It demands listening. And it demands action consistent with the Gospel proclaimed.

The example of educators like Mr Steve Donlan — who lived their vocation quietly, faithfully, and with integrity — stands as a moral measure against which institutional conduct must be examined. His legacy exposes the distance between what is taught within the safety of a school community and what is sometimes practised beyond it.

⸻

Truth, Repentance, and Hope

This reflection is offered in memory of a great teacher.

It is also offered as an appeal to conscience — that truth be named, that harm be repaired, and that institutions formed to serve the common good once again align their conduct with the dignity they proclaim.

The promise of the Resurrection is not cheap hope.

It follows repentance.

“The truth will set you free.”

Only when truth is fully faced can healing begin.

If this reflection feels heavy, please pause, take a breath, and know that you are not alone — as we enter Lent, may what is painful be held with gentleness, and space be made for truth, repair, and hope.

Lent invites remembrance, examination of conscience, and the courage to choose truth - even when it is costly

Hypertension - This Didn’t Come Out of Nowhere

“He heals the brokenhearted, and binds up their wounds.” Psalms  147:3

I’m sharing this because high blood pressure is often treated as something that appears suddenly, as if it arrives because someone is careless, unhealthy, or unable to cope. That assumption is not only wrong in my case — it erases the real cause.

What my body is showing now is the end point of prolonged exposure. It is not a momentary spike, not a bad day, and not a failure of resilience.

⸻

This was built over time

My blood pressure did not rise because of one stressful event. It rose because my body was held in a state of continuous threat for years, with no meaningful relief, no real safety, and no ability to stand down.

When a human nervous system is forced to remain on high alert long-term, blood vessels stay constricted, recovery never fully completes, and the body gradually stops trusting that rest is safe. That process is not psychological weakness. It is biological adaptation.

⸻

What the 24-hour monitor showed (14 February 2019)

In the early stages of what I now understand to be unmanaged psychosocial hazards at work, I wore a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor on what was recorded as a “normal” workday.

The results were not borderline.

Across the full 24 hours, my average blood pressure was 146/100 mmHg. During working hours, it averaged 151/103 mmHg. Even overnight — when the nervous system is meant to stand down and recover — it remained 130/92 mmHg. My maximum recorded reading reached 185/123 mmHg.

Ninety-six percent of my diastolic readings over the 24-hour period were above the normal threshold. During the day, 79% of systolic readings and 79% of diastolic readings were elevated. Even at night, 100% of diastolic readings were above the accepted limit.

This was not a single spike. It was sustained hypertension across an entire “ordinary” day and night.

This pattern is clinically consistent with autonomic dysregulation.

When the sympathetic (“fight-or-flight”) system remains chronically activated, blood vessels stay constricted and baseline vascular tone remains elevated. The body does not fully transition into parasympathetic recovery, even during sleep. The result is sustained diastolic hypertension, exaggerated daytime peaks, and inadequate restorative dipping.

In plain terms, my cardiovascular system was behaving as though it was under continuous threat — because it was.

This was not a brief emotional reaction. It was sustained physiological activation across a full 24-hour cycle.

I was formally diagnosed with hypertension and commenced medication as a result.

This is what prolonged workplace threat and unmanaged psychosocial hazard exposure can look like in the body.

⸻

What this is called

There is a name for this pattern.

Neurogenic hypertension refers to high blood pressure driven or amplified by the nervous system, particularly the sympathetic — or “fight-or-flight” — system.

In plain language, it means the brain and nervous system are continuously signalling “danger,” and the cardiovascular system is being forced to stay in a high-alert state.

Normally, the body alternates between sympathetic activation (alert, mobilised) and parasympathetic recovery (rest, repair). In neurogenic hypertension, that balance is lost. The parasympathetic system struggles to regain control. Blood pressure can remain elevated even at rest or during sleep. Small stressors can trigger disproportionate spikes.

This is not imagined. It is measurable.

Autonomic dysregulation leads to persistent physiological arousal, exaggerated responses to small stressors, and a failure to return to baseline even in safe conditions.

Importantly, this is reflexive, not voluntary. You cannot “think” your way out of it.

⸻

The number that made me stop

When my blood pressure recently measured in the 170s over 100s, with one reading at 173/112, I didn’t see a random medical problem. I saw evidence.

That number is not the beginning of the story. It is the receipt for what my body has been carrying.

⸻

What is actually happening in my body

In my case, the pattern reflects something very specific. My fight-or-flight system has been overpowering my baseline blood-pressure control. This is not “just anxiety.” It is sustained physiological stress load.

When the nervous system is held in threat mode for too long, it does not switch off simply because someone lies down, rests, or appears calm on the outside. People in this state can have markedly elevated blood pressure, particularly the lower number, while their pulse looks relatively normal. They can experience significant blood-pressure spikes even while at rest.

It can look like feeling wired but exhausted. Hypervigilance. Startle responses. Internal agitation. Difficulty relaxing even when tired. Sleep that is broken or non-restorative. Early morning waking with an adrenaline surge. Appetite disruption. Nausea during stress. Irritability without wanting to be. Emotional flattening or overwhelm.

These are downstream effects, not the cause.

That combination is not random. It makes sense once the cause is understood.

⸻

Why clinicians sometimes miss it

Blood pressure guidelines focus heavily on kidneys, salt, vascular stiffness, and age. Trauma physiology is still poorly integrated into cardiology. Symptoms are often dismissed as “anxiety,” particularly in women, who are disproportionately under-recognised.

That does not make the condition less real.

It simply means the framework is incomplete.

⸻

The cost of endurance

I endured because I had to. I kept showing up, complying, documenting, asking properly, escalating through the correct channels, and waiting for systems that were meant to protect me to intervene.

Instead, the threat persisted.

Silence, procedural obstruction, power imbalance, and prolonged uncertainty are not neutral experiences. They are physiological stressors. The body does not experience injustice as an abstract concept; it experiences it as danger.

⸻

Why duration matters more than intensity

Short stress passes. Acute stress resolves. What damages the nervous system is inescapable stress — situations with no clear end point, no effective protection, no restoration of agency, and repeated re-exposure.

Over time, the nervous system learns one rule: stay alert or you won’t survive. Once that happens, the body stops switching off.

Duration and inescapability matter more than intensity. This is why resilient people can still develop autonomic dysregulation.

⸻

This is what happens when safety never arrives

People sometimes ask why I didn’t “just rest.” The answer is simple: rest requires safety.

When the threat is ongoing — professionally, financially, or institutionally — the body does not interpret stillness as safe. It interprets it as exposure. So the system remains braced, day after day, year after year.

Eventually, that state shows up in the body in measurable ways, including sustained high blood pressure that places strain on the heart, brain, kidneys, and blood vessels. This happens quietly, without drama, and without collapse — until the body can no longer absorb the load.

⸻

What causes autonomic dysregulation

Common precipitating factors include prolonged threat or coercive environments, chronic trauma or unresolved danger, medical or institutional harm, long-term injustice without agency, repeated silencing, and illness combined with lack of safety.

These are not abstract conditions. They are lived environments.

And the body adapts to them.

⸻

This didn’t come from weakness

People like me often end up here after prolonged trauma or ongoing threat. It is common in those who have lived through workplace bullying or coercive control, years of unresolved injustice, being silenced or disbelieved, or navigating systems that cause harm instead of stopping it. It also appears in people who have lived in a state of constant vigilance without safety.

This is not about personality.

It happens to people who are otherwise capable, rational, disciplined, and resilient — people who keep going because they have to.

⸻

This is not about stress management

I am not talking about being “stressed.” I am talking about prolonged autonomic overload caused by sustained power imbalance, lack of procedural justice, silencing, uncertainty without resolution, and harm without accountability.

No amount of mindfulness fixes an environment that never allows the nervous system to stand down.

Medication alone rarely fixes this if the threat persists.

Nervous system regulation is not about platitudes. It requires actual safety, reduction of ongoing threat exposure, trauma-informed care, and time — not willpower.

⸻

What recovery actually requires

Recovery is not one thing, and it is not quick. It requires protecting the body medically while it is under strain, reducing ongoing harm and restoring some agency, and allowing the nervous system real time to relearn safety.

Autonomic dysregulation will not resolve while the nervous system still perceives ongoing injustice, unresolved danger, powerlessness, or forced silence. This does not mean everything must be fixed overnight, but it does mean restoring agency, reducing active exposure to harm, and being believed.

This is why purely psychological approaches often fail — the threat is real.

Recalibration is slow and biological. It happens through repeated experiences of actual safety, predictability, non-retaliatory environments, and time without fresh shocks.

Instead of “feeling calm,” real progress looks like blood-pressure spikes becoming less extreme, diastolic pressure trending down, faster recovery after triggers, slightly more restorative sleep, and the body standing down without effort.

These are biological wins, not mindset achievements.

Recovery is slow, layered, and conditional on safety.

This process is measured in months, sometimes longer. That is not failure. It is biology.

⸻

The truth I need people to understand

This did not come from nowhere. It did not happen overnight. And it did not happen because I couldn’t cope.

It happened because I was forced to survive without safety for too long.

⸻

Final word

If you want to understand my blood pressure, don’t look only at the numbers. Look at the years that led to them.

My body has been doing its job in an environment that hasn’t allowed it to rest.

That’s the truth of it.

Source: Cardiology report - 14-15 February 2019.

Further reading - scientific research on CVD risk from unmanaged psychosocial hazards in workplaces appears to be in the early stages. 

Romero Starke, K., Hegewald, J., Schulz, A.…(et. al). (2020). ‘Cardiovascular health outcomes of mobbing at work: results of the population- based, five-year follow-up of the Gutenberg health study.’ Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology. 15(15). [Open access]: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-020-00266-z

Xu, T., Magnusson Hanson, L.L., Lange, T., Starkopf, L., Westerlund, H., Madsen, I.E.H, et. al. (2019). ‘Workplace bullying and workplace violence as risk factors for cardiovascular disease: a multi-cohort study.’ European Heart Journal. 40(14). 1124–1134. [Online - Institutional access required] : https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy683

Herrmann-Lingen, C. (2018). ‘Victimization in the workplace: A new target for cardiovascular prevention?’ European Heart Journal. 40(14). 1135–1137. [Online - Institutional access required] : https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy728

Rodriguez-Munos, A., Notelaers, G., and Moreno-Jiménez, B. (2011). ‘Workplace bullying and sleep quality: The mediating role of worry and need for recovery September.’ Behavioral Psychology / Psicología Conductual, 19(2) 453-468 [Online OA version] : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236606535_Workplace_bullying_and_sleep_quality_The_mediating_role_of_worry_and_need_for_recovery