Erasmus Mundus MA Advanced Development in Social Work 2015-2017

Professional Ethics and Human Rights

A case study of domestic violence in Singapore-an

application of Human Rights Approach
 
 
 
 

Student: Cathy Cao Xi

 
 
 
Lisbon 2016

 
 
 Introduction

Domestic violence, a term frequently mentioned in both social work practice and human
rights work. World Health Organization (2005) define domestic violence as “violence
against women by male intimate partners”. The violence here refers to physical and sexual
violence, emotional abuse and controlling behaviour by current partners or ex-partners.
(World Health Organization, 2005). Most states once ignored the problem as a private
matter when dated to 1990s, while a number of countries had recognized it as a human
rights and public health problem in recent years (World Health Organization, 2005;
Hawkins and Humes, 2002). Legislation has been enacted to prosecute offenders as well as
to prevent violence in the home (Hawkins and Humes, 2002).

The domestic violence against women, however, is still widespread worldwide. Social
worker, as helping professionals, often encounter women who are victims of domestic
violence. “shelter” has become a common intervention that is believed to separate women
from perpetrators and to provide a safe and confidential place for women (Hawkins and
Humes, 2002). The report conduct by WHO (2015) indicate that women frequently return
home to a partner who had abused them. This sees a conflict between professional
intervention provided by social worker and service users’ own decision. Social worker, in
this scenario, often face dilemma between providing professional help and respecting
service users’ self-determination.
 
This essay will firstly elaborate a case work which the author encountered in her social
work practice in Singapore. Then a rights-based approach will be applied to analyze the
issues faced by a migrant woman. This analysis will draw focus on ethics and human rights.
After which, the author will reflect about the lessons learned from this particular case.
Finally, in a broader view, how this case study brings far reaching impacts to victims in
other national contexts will be discussed.

Case background

This case talks about a family the author worked with from 2013 to 2015. C approached
Family Service Centre (FSC) for financial help in May 2013 and the case was managed by
worker from May 2013 to August 2015. C was a 29-year-old mother with two children
from two marriages. C had a 7-year-old son from her 1st marriage in Philippine and a 3-
year-old daughter from her 2nd marriage in Singapore. She had lived in Singapore for three
years since she moved to Singapore and she hold a long term visit pass (LTVP) to guarantee
her stay in Singapore. In the same year, C moved to stay with her boyfriend, M, who then
become her husband in 2015, and fought for a divorce with her husband. C and M had their
first daughter, S, in July 2013. There were conflicts between C and M weekly and the
conflicts had resulted in physical violence a few times. C was observed with bruises in her
arms and legs.

The family relationships could be seen from genogram when the author intake the case at
2003.
 1984  
29  
Mohd   C   M  

2011  
2  
?   ?   ?  
Nur  
 

At October 2014, C walked in office with heavily tears and shared that she wanted to leave
M. When worker explored details, she shared that she quarrelled with M again and both S
and her was beat by M. C mentioned that she was worried about her children’s safety (C
was pregnant again) due to M’s violent behaviors. She shared she has no freedom in the
house as she was not allowed to see or call her friends only if M is around. Moreover, M
did not allow C to go out alone and C felt being controlled. C doubted whether she should
register a marriage with M. Hence, she requested to stay in shelter, mainly for the safety
concern of her children.

On the same day, C was admitted to shelter and a police reported has been issued in police
station in the following day. Three days later, C went back to M’s house and the couple got
married in November 2014. During that period, worker was not able to reach C. Later
November 2014, M and C came to see worker for financial help. In an individual session,
C shared that she needed to marry M for extending her LTVP as well as the residential
status of her children. As for her marital relationship with her M, she hoped for the best.
Worker and C worked out a safety plan and C was also informed about the possibility to
stay in shelter if she wants.

Theoretical discussion

Two things had repeated stirred in my mind when I was working with C. Firstly, the
assessment of domestic violence was debatable. The violence encompassed not only
physical harm but also emotional abuse as well as behavior controlling from perpetrator
(World Health Organization, 2005). Although both my supervisor and I had sensed that C
likely experienced domestic violence at home during our very first few months interactions
with C, there were not much interventions we could do due to C’s silence. C’s silence on
her family situation has to be understand from the environment where she was in. Her
dependences on husband for visa application as well as financial supply, the culture values
that view domestic violence as a family matter, all function together to contribute to her
silences. It has undoubtedly brought difficulties for worker to assess the domestic violence
if the victims keep silent. If we are talking about individual’s rights to make choices, then
the decisions to seek help or keep silence were reserved to the abused women.

However, according to the code of ethics (IFSW, 2012), social work is a profession to
promote well being of individuals. It is almost impossible for us to not to do anything when
we know the individual’s wellbeing is in threat. Our professional judgements guide us to
assess the risk of service users. Furthermore, it leads to an intervention plan. In my case, I
placed C in shelter because the priority was to ensure her safety. She was admitted in the
shelter but she went back home after a short stay. Again, the dilemma occurs, on one hand
I provide intervention to ensure her safety, on the other hand she reserves the right to accept
the intervention or not. This had made me reflected more about the intervention plan. We,
as professionals, thought we give the best solution to service users and somehow we impose
the “best solution” to them. In so doing, we violate service users’ rights to define their own
needs and own solutions to some extend. Hence, we have created imbalance power
relations between professionals and service users which in a way disempowers service
users (Uggerhøj and Matthies, 2014).

I started to ask myself, why C’s choices have to be limited to shelter and home? It is of
vital to intake her perspectives in intervention plan and come up with a solution in the way
she wants. For instance, instead of removing victims from the danger environment, we
could also think about removing perpetrators.

Another ethical right involved in domestic violence is the child’s rights. In the case of C,
her two young kids were exposed in a violent environment. It is commonly accepted that
that a child who expose in domestic violence may result in mental, behavioral issues. The
Convention of the rights of the Child have stated clearly to “protect children’s rights and
create an environment where they can grow and reach their potential” (UN General, 2014).
Social worker code of ethics (IFSW, 2012) also indicate that worker needs to protect child
from the violent environment, which is usually remove the child from the family and place
them in a safe environment. However, the convention has emphasised the parents’
guidance in nurturing children (UN General, 2014). When working with domestic violence,
we often see these conflicts between child’s rights and parental rights. At that point of time,
I reported the case to Child Protection Officer and leave the further assessment on child’s
needs to them.

Reflection
There is no doubt to say, that, domestic violence against women is a violation of women’s
rights. A few international treaties and agreements such as the United Nations Declaration
on the Elimination of Violence against Women (1993), the 1994 Programme of Action of
the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), and the 1995
Declaration and Platform for Action of the Fourth World Conference on Women (the
“Beijing Declaration”) agree on it.

Social work, as a helping profession, we agree on the above laws and argue for women’s
rights. But the understanding of domestic violence subjects to workers’ own values to some
extend. For instance, a worker who adopts psychodynamic perspective will likely view
abused women as a responsible for their plight (Rounsaville, 1978). Family system theorists
suggest that the violent behaviors are in relation to the interaction between husband and
wife, the role of society in the dynamics of abuse within the family, and the role of family
as the original model (Perilla, 1999). More recent, feminist models of violence against
women focus on the imbalance of power between female and male and sees patriarchy as
a root of domestic violence (Bograd, 1984).

Those different values lead to different needs assessments in practice (Ife, 2008). Certainly,
a social worker with a strong feminist perspective will define the needs of abused women
differently from a worker with a conservative patriarchy value. Ife (2008) had criticized
that the needs definition could be a form of human right abuse if we exert our professional
judgement over service users’ “real” needs. Further, Ife (2008) suggested that “needs must
be understood as statements of values, of ideologies” and people are encouraged to define
their own needs.

Therefore, it is of vital for social workers to have a “right” value and a “right” position. we
can not only view the issue as a family matter that requires no interventions but from a
more holistic ecological perspective (Ife, 2008). The ecological perspective takes children,
perpetrators into consideration in terms of assessment and intervention. Social worker, in
this situation, may collaborate with Child Protection officers to safeguard the child and
ensure the children’s need to be met.
Not only we ought to help in a family level but also we are devoted to bring changes in the
societal level. The changers should not only be brought by social workers but the
responsibilities also expand to every individual, including the abused women, the husbands,
the local neighbourhood as well as the society as a whole (Perilla, 1999). To this end, Perilla
(1999) proposed “concientización (critical consciousness)” as a solution to address the root
causes of domestic violence.

“Concientización” is borrowed by Martín-Baró (1994) from Paulo Freire’s (1978), which

means
“the knowledge of the historical and social conditions in our countries of origin that
will help us understand more fully the dynamics of migration to this country. It is a
recognition of the tremendous inequality between rich and poor, women and men, and
boys and girls in our society. Critical consciousness demands an understanding of the
historical roots of oppression that created the social structures under which we were
born and raised and into whose values and norms we have been socialised. It is about
reinventing our culture in light of the new reality of this new country, creating a mestizo
culture that includes both the old and the new. ” (Perilla, 1999)

This requires males to increase their awareness of the false roles and expectations that
shaped by norms and values. Further more, Perilla (1999) pointed out that this has to do
with a cultural redefinition. In details, we need to question about what makes a real man
from a positive attribute of machismo. For instance, the patriarchy system in many Asia
families should not be taken normal. Males in the families should be aware of it.

In terms of abused women, Perilla (1999) empathized that “concientización has to do with
the acquisition of knowledge regarding resources, laws, and options available in this
country”. Certainly, domestic violence is not an individual issue, “but rather it is one that
belongs to the entire community”. Only the abused women realize that they need a
redefinition of their identities so they are able to build up a new equal relationship with
either current husbands or new partners.

As for children, it is of importance for the parents as well as other adults to provide
education on history, traditions, mythology, stories, arts. In so doing, children are likely to
have an in-depth understanding of their roots (Perilla, 1999). Moreover, a nonviolence
environment should be provided by the parents. Hence, children’s access to educational
opportunities, to resources, and to medical, dental, and mental health care should be
enforced.
Reference:

Bograd, M. (1984). Family systems approaches to wife battering: A feminist critique.

American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 54(4), 558-568.

Freire, P. (1978). Education for a critical consciousness. New York: Seabury Press.

Hawkins, D. and Humes, M. (2002) Human rights and domestic violence. Political Science
Quarterly, 117(2) 231-257.

Ife, J. (2008). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

IFSW (2012) Statement of Ethical Principles | International Federation of Social Workers.

Geneva, Switzerland. [online] Available from: http://ifsw.org/policies/statement-of-ethical-
principles/ [Accessed 18 Dec. 2016].

Martín-Baró, I. (1994). Writings for a liberation psychology (A. Aron & S. Corne, Eds.).
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Perilla, J.L. (1999) Domestic violence as a human rights issue: The case of immigrant latinos.
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 21(2) 107-133.

Rounsaville, B. J. (1978). Theories of marital violence: Evidence from a study of battered

women. Victimology: An International Journal, 3(1-2), 11-31.

Uggerhøj, L. and Matthies, A.-L. (2014) ‘Chapter 13: The Powerful meeting between Social
Workers and Service Users: Needs, Barriers and Possibilities in Participation Processes in
Agency Settings’, pp. 201-215, in Matthies, Aila-Leena and Uggerhøj, Lars ‘Participation
(2014) Marginalization and Welfare Services – Concepts, Politics, and Practices Across
European Countries, Ashgate, England.

UN General (2014) Convention of the rights of the child. Available from http://www. unicef.
org/crc/crc.htm [Accessed 18 Dec 2016].

World Health Organization, Multi-country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence
against Women. Available from
http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/43310/1/9241593512_eng.pdf [Accessed 18 Dec
2016].