UNIVERSITIES AT WAR
An Auckland professor is accused of ‘prolonged sexual harassment’, but his university resists pressure to investigate. Alison Mau reports.
Allegations of ‘sexual stalking’, bullying and harassment by an internationally-renowned New Zealand academic have sparked a bitter trans-Tasman row between major universities.
Allegations of sexual stalking and harassment by an internationally-renowned New Zealand academic have sparked a bitter trans-Tasman row between major universities.
Leaders of the Australian National University (ANU) in Canberra, and Auckland’s AUT, are at loggerheads over whether a formal complaint against decorated scholar and AUT Pro Vice-Chancellor Max Abbott should be investigated.
Professor Abbott, 68, is codirector of the National Institute for Public Health and Mental Health Research, founder of New Zealand’s Mental Health Foundation, and a worldwide leader in the field of gambling addiction. The five-page complaint against him was laid in August 2019 by Dr Marisa Paterson, 37, the director of ANU’s Centre for Gambling Research and a candidate for Labor in October’s Australian state elections.
Paterson’s complaint detailed hundreds of texts sent to her by Abbott over the course of two and a half years, many of them sexually explicit, and alleged that he threatened her career when she cut contact with him – but for almost a year, the university has refused to carry out a formal investigation despite being requested to do so by Paterson’s employer.
Now, New Zealand ConsulGeneral and former Labour minister Dame Annette King has been asked to intervene to break the deadlock.
In response to questions from the Sunday Star-Times, Abbott said he was ‘‘surprised, indeed shocked’’ by Paterson’s complaint, and had not had any reason to think he was harassing her, before she cut off contact in August 2019.
‘‘There was certainly no communication from her to me that claimed or suggested that.
‘‘On receipt of Dr Paterson’s complaint, and it appearing from it that she had been uncomfortable with our relationship, I apologised for whatever part I had played in this and undertook to cease any further communication. I have not communicated with Dr Paterson since,’’ the statement reads.
The Star-Times has since confirmed with Abbott that he provided a second, more detailed, apology to Paterson.
Paterson described having a friendly, professional relationship with Abbott after they met at an industry conference in Portugal in 2016, and says he was initially a ‘‘supportive mentor type’’. But she says his communication turned sexual after they met again at a two-day industry gathering in Melbourne in November 2017, where she mentioned her marriage had broken down.
Texts between the two show Abbott messaged Paterson up to a dozen times a day from early morning until late at night, regularly bringing the topic back to sex.
She says early in their text exchanges, she engaged in sexting with Abbott on two occasions, and on the first of those, in November 2017, sent him a picture of herself from the waist up, wearing a bra.
‘‘I managed to deflect it as much as I could until that night. I thought it would get him off my back. It was consensual in the fact that I was replying to his messages, but I was deeply distressed about it.’’
When Paterson did not return his texts on Christmas Day 2017, she says he made 10 unanswered calls to her cellphone.
Texts and emails show Paterson then made a number of attempts to disengage. On February 18, 2018, she told him, ‘‘You know I am in a relationship and you know that nothing can ever happen between us. I need to take a break from the messaging and focus on my relationship with my (heart emoji)’’.
She claimed Abbott agreed repeatedly to leave her alone, but would continue to text her questions about work and her personal life. If she did not reply, he would say he was concerned for her welfare.
In one text, he talks of his ‘‘pathological obsession’’ with her.
Abbott says he and Paterson had ‘‘both modified our communications after Dr Paterson became involved with a new relationship’’.
‘‘My communication was also modified by my own changing personal situation. That said, we continued to remain in contact, albeit less frequently and primarily by email, regarding personal and professional matters.’’
In her complaint, Paterson says she felt compelled to ‘‘manage’’ Abbott’s attention as he had direct influence over her career prospects.
‘‘Max is the leading academic in my field of gambling research. It was highly important for me to have a constructive working relationship with him.’’
She says she stopped replying to Abbott’s texts in June 2019 and moved all communication with him to her university email address.
In early August, after he sent another text, she ‘‘reached breaking point’’ and pleaded for Abbott to stop all contact. Shortly afterwards, her partner sent angry and threatening texts to Abbott telling him to stay away. Abbott responded by threatening to involve police.
In an email seen by the StarTimes, Abbott then explicitly threatened Paterson’s career.
‘‘Was about to ask if you wanted to be part of two research proposals. History. Bye’’ he wrote on August 3. In a text on the same night, he again infers he will not work with her again; ‘‘all contact terminated. Work things too.’’
Five days later, he sent an email saying he had ‘‘overreacted’’ (sic).
‘‘I would like to stay in touch professionally. There are some research projects coming up here that you may be interested in contributing to. I will understand if you don’t want to remain in contact.’’
Abbott said the second email proved Paterson had no reason to think he had threatened her career.
‘‘While my email about ceasing communication (both personal and professional) in response to the altercation with Dr Paterson’s partner on 3 August 2019 could have initially been interpreted by her in that way, my email of 8 August 2019 in which I apologised, said I over-reacted, and stated that I was open to retaining professional and research collaboration, made it clear that I had no intention whatsoever of adversely influencing her career progression.’’
In an interview with the Star-Times, Paterson said she believed she could not advance up the academic tier system without Abbott’s support.
‘‘To get promoted . . . I had to demonstrate in my job interview that I had developed links and associations with international institutions and academics.
‘‘It’s an absolute requirement of my job position description. If I am not doing that, I’m not doing my job and will not get promoted.’’
In late August 2019, ANU sent Paterson’s complaint to AUT asking that the university apologise to Paterson, instruct Abbott to cease all contact with her, and withdraw from work which ‘‘might put him in a position to affect her career outcomes’’.
She said the potential impact on her career was also why she waited to make a complaint.
‘‘It’s a very small cohort of researchers around the world in the gambling field, and we all know each other pretty well. The risks of lodging the complaint have ramifications for me, in my other working relationships.’’
In late August 2019, ANU sent Paterson’s complaint to AUT asking that the university apologise to Paterson, instruct Abbott to cease all contact with her, and withdraw from work which ‘‘might put him in a position to affect her career outcomes’’. It also asked for a full investigation and action to ensure the behaviour was not repeated with other female staff, students or collaborators.
Instead, Abbott replied with a letter addressing the complaint. In it, he promised Paterson he would ‘‘make all possible efforts not to put myself in a position to influence your career outcomes’’, but noted that might be difficult in practice.
‘‘As you know I chair the international think-tank and biennial International Gambling Conferences. I do not intend to resign from those or other positions.’’
He then suggested Paterson consider ‘‘reframing the request to be that I don’t do anything to adversely influence your career prospects?’’
He told Paterson he had intended to recommend she be invited to an inaugural World Health Organisation meeting on gambling, but would now ‘‘need guidance on that’’.
‘‘I can understand something of what was involved emotionally in you making this complaint. I apologise for my recent texts and anything I have said or done over the years that have caused you distress,’’ the letter reads.
In a statement to the StarTimes, AUT says Abbott had ‘‘apologised unreservedly, agreed to have no future contact with the ANU staff member and also agreed to withdraw from, or not accept, any position that might affect the ANU staff member.’’
Paterson says the letter came as a shock after she explicitly asked for no further contact with Abbott, but she was more upset by the university’s lack of response.
‘‘They didn’t engage with the complaint at all. There was no acknowledgment of anything that had happened, and it appeared like they were handing it over to him to deal with.’’
AUT’s statement says the university took the issue seriously and sought to resolve it, reviewing material provided by ANU, and interviewing Abbott.
‘‘As recently as the last week of April, we contacted ANU to remind them we were still waiting for them to communicate any further concerns. Nothing has been received.
‘‘We have not received other complaints about our staff member,’’ it said.
In the 10 months since August, despite persistent urging by ANU, AUT managers have refused to launch a further investigation into Paterson’s complaint.
In a letter, ANU ViceChancellor Professor Brian Schmidt insists AUT has a ‘‘duty to our academic community’’ to conduct a full probe. Documents seen by the StarTimes show AUT human resources staff have repeatedly refused to do so, saying Abbott
was asked to apologise and had done so, and the university considered the matter closed. ANU refused to accept Abbott’s apology letter as it considered it did not address the ‘‘systematic and prolonged’’ nature of his behaviour. It criticised AUT for failing to apologise for Abbott and for not taking the ‘‘appropriate action’’ it had asked for. Further interaction between the universities in September and October shows the relationship becoming increasingly fractious.
Documents show that on September 17, AUT director of employment relations Sean Williams held a teleconference call with ANU human resources director Dr Nadine White, telling her AUT would not investigate and that neither ANU nor Paterson had any right to know what action, if any, AUT would take against Abbott.
In an email on October 8, ANU again asked for an investigation.
An email from Williams on October 16 insisted ‘‘AUT considers the matter concluded’’, and instructed ANU to stop copying other AUT staff into any further correspondence.
It’s at this point that Schmidt intervened with a letter to the heads of AUT’s governing council, Chancellor John Maasland and Pro Chancellor Sussan Turner.
The letter describes Abbott’s behaviour towards Paterson as ‘‘prolonged and persistent stalking, sexual harassment, and bullying’’.
‘‘Dr Paterson has advised ANU that she had attempted to manage this situation herself for two years but by the middle of this year found the situation too overwhelming and threatening to both her professional and personal life.’’
Schmidt told the AUT council Paterson was fearful of the potential impact of reporting Abbot’s behaviour on her career.
‘‘It is very concerning to Dr Paterson that Professor Abbott indicated in an email . . . that he is withdrawing Dr Paterson’s involvement in future research projects. This appears to validate Dr Paterson’s concern that she may experience ongoing professional bullying, and is fearful of being ostracised by the community of researchers for disclosing these issues.’’
He says along with a commitment to keep Paterson safe, he has ‘‘a duty to our international academic community to make sure this complaint is thoroughly investigated to ensure no further harm occurs.’’
The Star-Times understands AUT Vice-chancellor Derek McCormack then held a conference call with Schmidt, again insisting the matter was a private one and was now closed following Abbott’s letter of apology to Paterson.
Faced with a deadlock, Schmidt asked Dame Annette King to intervene. In March, King met Schmidt, Paterson and White via video conference. In a statement to the StarTimes, King confirmed her involvement but said the matter was between the universities and their staff.
‘‘My role was to connect the ANU with the appropriate contact at the AUT in an effort for the matter to be resolved between them. I have no further comment,’’ she said.
ANU said it could not comment on individual cases for privacy reasons, but ‘‘sexual harassment is never okay’’.
‘‘Our priority is always the wellbeing and welfare of our community, and if anyone brings such allegations to us, they are heard, they are believed and they are supported.’’
Paterson says with communications stalled and the ACT state election six months away, she’s waiting for a breakthrough and is concerned about the possible fallout.
‘‘This is important and so is my political run – but I have kept them as two distinctly separate processes.
‘‘I also didn’t ever think this complaint process would take this long.’’
AUT director of employment relations Sean Williams said neither ANU nor Paterson had any right to know what action, if any, AUT would take against Abbott.