Counselling notes law doesn't go far enough, according to a survey by Mayo's Beyond Surviving
Castlebar-based Beyond Surviving gathered the views of 52 survivors on proposed amendments to disclosure law relating to counselling records
A new survey by survivor advocacy organisation Beyond Surviving has found that the vast majority of survivors do not support proposed legislation on the disclosure of counselling records in sexual offence trials as currently drafted, with most calling for stronger protections.
Beyond Surviving was founded by Castlebar woman Ciara Mangan. Mangan, who has become one of Ireland's most prominent voices on the rights of survivors of sexual violence.
Her advocacy on the issue reached an international stage last June, when she was part of an Irish delegation at the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, where she used her address to call for exactly this change in Irish law.
The consultation, carried out between 6 and 9 June 2026, gathered the views of 52 survivors on proposed amendments to disclosure law relating to counselling records. The findings were stark: 78.57 per cent of respondents said they do not support the Bill as currently drafted, while 85.37 per cent believe the proposed amendments do not go far enough to protect survivors within the boundaries of what is legally permissible. Three quarters of respondents said the issue required further consideration and thought.
Beyond Surviving said the consultation demonstrated ‘once again’ that there is no singular survivor view.
“The findings speak for themselves: survivors understand the constitutional constraints within which reform must operate, but many believe the proposals and amendments, as currently drafted, do not yet go far enough to provide the legally permissible protections survivors need,” the organisation said.
Among the concerns raised by survivors was the absence of an explicit presumption of non-disclosure in the text of the Bill, despite this being a stated intention of the legislation.
Speaking in the Dáil, Independent TD Paul Gogarty noted that respondents to the survey also highlighted the lack of a clear statutory test based on relevance, necessity and proportionality, warning that vague drafting risks repeating the failures of Section 19A of the Criminal Evidence Act 1992.
As one survivor put it: "The drafting needs to be precise. The failures of section 19A cannot be repeated."
A recurring theme in the consultation was the issue of survivor agency.
Independent TD Paul Gogarty, who raised the consultation findings in the Dáil, said survivors recognised some positive elements in the Bill, including the requirement that all applications for counselling records go before a judge, a form of statutory privilege, and extended protections to other sensitive records such as medical or child protection files. However, he echoed the concerns raised by survivors.
"The stated intention relating to the presumption of non-disclosure does not appear in the text," Deputy Gogarty told the Dáil. "If the law does not operate as it is intended, it is not going to work. We must have an explicit presumption, not an implied one."
He also highlighted the lack of survivor agency as a critical gap: "It is their notes and their life being discussed, yet they have absolutely no input."
"Survivors want reform that works," the organisation said. "They want legislation that delivers genuine protections in practice, learns from the unintended consequences of previous reforms, and is informed by meaningful engagement with survivors and survivor support organisations."