- Email: [email protected]
Social work ethics and children: Protection versus empowerment
Social Work Ethics and Children: Protection
Versus Empowerment
Jerry Fox
Evidence adolescents intrusi\-e, den\. the perceptions recognize ohm li\.es. the social abuse and
indicates that a grwing proportion of children 2nd experience tlaclitional child protective services as oppressive, and even esploitive. Professionals tend to realit!, that voungsters experience, project their ohm arid vulntrahilities onto >.oungsters, and refuse to the ahilit\~ and right of voungsters to control theit Enipob.etnient of nlinorr is an ethical obligation of h.orli profession and the only true protection froni neglect.
The inspiration for this paper comes from three sources: first, III!. o\vn experience as a survivor of child abuse; second. the esperiences of my daughter and foster son as victims of child abuse; and third, my paraprofessional ant1 professional practice l\,ith neglected ancl abused children and adolescents. The research for this paper is based on three sources: first, of my wm social work practice: second, t1t.o surve>‘s of recipients child welfare services, conducted over a period of 14 months, to learn their experiences as clients in the child ivelfare system; and third, an extensive re\.iew of historical, theoretical, empirical, and contemporary child r\.elfare literature. One of the obstacles to more responsi\,e services is the ten-
320
Fos
321
Social Work Ethics and Children
to 16. k\.ho are homeless, I QXS told that it is impossible fijr persons that age to be homeless because the law does not allow it. The normal child continues to be representeci in the professional literature as the one who does not question the labels, projections, illusions, and the surreal fantasy l\.orlcl professionals create for kids with their psychiatric mumbo-jumbo; i\.ho ne\.er myrt.s herself or himself in creating an alternative agenda of priorities ~\~hich clefme her or his OWR rwu& from a non-adult perspective; and rvho docilely cor~forv~ to the expectations of whatever adult services, programs, or centers happen to be fashionable that season. Some Consequences
of Child Oppression
There is some truth to the folk wisdom that if one tells a child something cannot be clone, then she or he is likely to try. it. \\‘e know that permissiveness builds self-cliscipline by de\,eloplng the child’s capacity for strengthening not only responsible clecisionmaking, but also coping skills and the ability to deal with the effects on others of those decisions (Xdams, 197 1). Permissiveness shoutcl uot be confused ivith letting children behave selfishI\,; rather, it is an approach that refuses to see the child as an object for adult gratification and, instead, emphasizes adult self-control and pro\.ision of a safe learning environment, i\.hile permitting the child to choose freely her or his own course of action i\.ithin the limits ot that environment. Of course, children need limits, and permissiveness ivithout limits neglects the child’s need to learn that there are ctfzcvzy limits in any interaction with other people in the environment. 1Vhen I practice permissiveness, \b.hat I’m cloing is riot abdicating III): adult responsibilitv but rather giving kids some control over their ~)xltl lives bv creaiing choices for them, within the limits of my resources, in a w.ay that socializes them to interact with other adults am~rti~vh, rather than submissively, and that prepares them to transfer that learning in order to seek other nonexploitative relationships ivith other adults. But in most interactions with adults, not only are children denied fundamental choices that affect their li\,es, their very ability to make those choices is denied. Denial of the ability to choose provides ad u I ts with an excuse to make all the child’s choices, from decisions as private and personal as choice of friends to decisions as public and political as w*ho will represent minors in Congress (Kodham, 1979, pp. 32-33). Deny a child some means of economic independence, ancl is it any 1%.oncler that most home burglaries are committed by children?
322
FOX
It hns long txcn ol~s~n~ctl 13:. soci;t! sc.ictltists that rlic ttiost rfpt.th,i\.t ar~t! rigid soc+eticb prodi~~v the ftighcst ptx~potT_iot~5 ot \.iolt’tlt. r!estrltcti\.c, :iriti a~ttttot-itat-iatl pctx~tialitics (Keic.!l, ICI7 I. !I. 11’). It is these aiitliot-it~ll.i~ltl !xtw)tl;klitics \\.I10 of‘tetl Ixcottlc tllc tlvxt gctict-;ttiotl t~f a!>u.set~s and opptxssot-s 01‘ c.!iilt!I-eti.
Lit!% I\-!>() take control of‘ their o~\‘tt :ti‘i\tit-s. irxtitnacics. idcnrilit-c. t‘roi-il ttl\’ ot)ser-uiiotl. inentall~~ 2nd etnotit5 . ;~tlcl socializatioti tiotiall\. tiealtlIicr t!iati ttiosc kids \\,lro ititct~ndlize cotif~otmit~.. ;tc‘c!uicscctice, alltl po\\Yt-lMl~ss. Being it, u)tlttx)! of‘ otit”s oi\.tf lifk is coi~itnotl!~~ xxcplv~! as ;t Critct.ioti ii)t- ~ii~rit~il !iealt!t. Espcriertce scr-Gtig zserri\.e. alienxtec! \-out11 sitggmts ttiat tlicit. tnosl prv\xletlt tiecd is for ctll!)o~\-eTtIlctIt. ot’ \.outig pwple might do tllLlc!l i.:nlf,o\~~et.ttletII to t-tY!ltcc tl1e tt~oit!)!t~g be!i;t~~iot- of‘p-ob.irlg tIutn!wt-s ot‘cf~ilttwt~ ant! ;tc!c~!e5c~etlts. Dettia! ot‘ pox\~et~ to minors txised upon assutnptions of‘ theititiuotnpcteticc t-ititis no suppor~l iti ct.trtyent ps~c!~olo~ic;tl t-cscxr-ctl. ;ttirl citt‘rvtit ps\~~!iological 1itcr;ttitt.c !)ro\.iclcs t;o c\,itltLtlc.c rll;t! >ICi ole4cetlts ;iqwl i4 to 13 \~c;it-5 ;tw tli~tit~g~tis!l;i!~le l‘rotn atlults \\.it!l ~x~s!xx~i to statittal-tls of.‘cc,rll!>etctl~c iti clecisiotl-nl~t~irIg !>t’(l(‘esse> ;tnd olltcotlle (.\leIton, I wi, I’]‘. 1 oo10 Ii. C:at!iei-ine Ross. .Assist;int I’r-ofes3ot~ of‘ Histon. at tile: Child St.itc!!, (Ienter of’ tile 1.21~ L:tli\.crsit!. School of‘ .\leclicitie. points out that et‘t’ot-ts to protect chiltlt-ct1 sttztn t‘t.otn im!~osition of. conscr\~;tti\c Ati~t’ri~;in mic!c!!e-class \aities atl(! ttlat the twttltirtg !cgis!atioti. ~t~llate\Yt- its statet! pill-!>osc. aims not to ;tssut-e t!lc essctiti;tl right< ot citizetlship !)t.tt t-attier to a!)t-ogatt2 t!:os;t rights (Ko45. 1
Social
b’ork
Ethics
and Children
323
trtciital Iicalrl~ pt.otessioital5 shoultl iw special I)rotectors ot. r-liiltlt-cati‘\ rights. at times the\ ha\e iiot seetltecl to t~itlltll ttii5 twlx)ithil)ilit\ LCI-\ \vcll. perhap c-c~titt~ihttit~ :< to the need f.0~ the ctiiltlt~et~‘~ t.ixtlts tito\tmtt’tlt. Kale petxeptiotib. theol-etical c)l-ietltation. extend pta5itws. p;titcit\ of atitl coti~plesit~~ ot‘ task at-e cotlsiclrtxxl ;I> sct~vices. contlict u,itti parents. txwotis. [I‘hcre is a] tieccl t’oi- the ptwtessic~t;al to lxke ;t htrotig ethic:tl position. goittg be!ot:tl ttxlitiottal guiclclittes. (p. 3 18) It is not safe to pr~esiitxe ttiat ct~ilrlreti Iia\,e intcixxts tllnt 31-c tut~inot~ioi~s b,ith those of their aclitlt carctakcr-s. \\.tiile \\.c continue to claim to Ix speaking /ot- chilclreti. u.e tia\,c been hrgelv i~ncot~ccl-nerl with the \ieh3 of‘ children and youth about ttiejr status. .\[eltoti (I !)SZ) suggests that “l>;\t.ticip~~tic)ti iii decisions coticet~t~it~~ them is is etliicall~~ aticl lepllb. petmiittctt. or even clen~a~ictecl, iii sotii~’ situations” (11. 537). X 14-l,eat,-old t,o!. n.110 li\,ecl on the streets ot‘ Se\\. I’ot-k Cit\once told tne that of all the people: \\.ho tucl at,itsecl aticl esploited him, social u~orkers nw-e the \\‘ot‘st. He \\‘ettt on to s;t\. that kids like hittiself n~lio are tit-d of atlults u.\iug tlietn. met call’ing it helping. t~t3A lllil’\‘Pt-\. not social ~\~ot~kers. I got tiim 21lar\~Vet. so he coltlcl sue sotilc 0F the adults, itictitding the social \\~orket-s iii pt~estigiouj agencies, b.110 had ken using him aticl ahsing tiini. legall>, anti othenvise. to nuke thetnsclves and their agencies look good. Because lie axis ;i tnitiol-, tiobic\.ct., no court \\.oiilcI accept his complaints n,ittiout still atiotliet. csploiti\,e agencv and ahiisi\r acldt ititniclin~ on his life. a cotictitioti ttlat in no itncexiin terms tie flatI:, rejected. I’hus, b.tiile tie tried to etiiploy legal tiieans to obtain legal ~jctstice fat- tiiniselt‘, the legal s>xetii clenlanclect that tie submit to still more injustice hefore the\, h~oulc\ e\‘ctl listen to him. Getting ;t‘l;i~~~ver Cot- this 1x11~\\x one of the tiiox clangel-oiis Il’otd leaId to ;1 large professional ititen.entions of‘ III!’ career. public child pi-otecti\.c agctlcv , that this t>o\. intended to file child ser&use and kictnappitig dial-:ges against sotii~ of their protective \.ice staff’. and suclclenl\~ both tii\’ client aticl I fo~incl ourscl\.es folI0b.d t)y detectives. ;\ social \;.ork colleague itit’ormecl tile of ;I t‘utnor that kicltiapping charges h.et‘e being prepared against tne tot- ha\.ing seen the boy pi-ofessiotiall~~ b.ithottt the permission of some ofticial b.tio had never e\‘en met the voutti. Finallv, the ho\\\.a imprisoned for 1‘L months ancl then t’eleasecl txd onto thk streets xvhere he continues to 1iL.e. I b,ill relate ;t f‘ut-her, eqiiall~~ shockin g csatllpl’ ftull 111v (>\\‘I1 practice. TIVO I,rothel-s. aged 9 and 1 I \‘eat-s, h’f2t.e clisco\.ereci to he
324
Fox
having sesual relations with each other in a chilclren’s summer camp i\.here I servecl as clinical director. Upon hearing this, the state’s clepartment of children and families services sent a carload of in\.estigators ancl social tvorkers to the camp. FL’ithout so much as having met the two bovs, these officials presented the executive clirector ancl me \\.ith plans to immediate? hospitalize both brothers in separate long-term psychiatric hospitals, terminate the custocl!. of the brothers’ parents to all five of their children without a hearing, suspencl our entire chilcl care staff pencling extensive FBI background in\,estigations, and prosecute phantom adults presumed to be “turnirfg these young children into psychosexual deviates.” The plan also mcludecl daily anal penetration, F\-hat I call rape, to cletermine if any of our children were being anally penetrated. These officials were astonished at my suggestion that someone should interview the brothers before anv action was taken. Having done so, I referred the boys to our reg’ional mental health center ancl chilcl guidance clinic for extensive further interviews and testing, which established clearly that there was no rational basis for anv of the state’s plans. With the help of the staff at the center and .’ . chmc, we convmced them that the brothers’ right to refuse unwarranted and unwanted assaults on their lives by well-meaning but misguided professionals should be respected, and the embarrassecl of‘ficials returned to their offices. The ethics of our profession as social workers demand that we commit our professional resources to the empotverment of out stanclients. Huey Newton writes, “We are asking for a ‘human dard to arm kids with, within tvhich we as adults can deai with out own problems and uptighteclness bvhile kids are free to cletermine their own lives” (cited in Moocher, 1976, p. 2). Empowering children would require our profession to take more sur%~~tslvand more literally its code of ethics. It would require a radical overhaul of naive, outdated, simplistic, and self-serving conceptions of childhood and adolescence. Most difficult of all, It ivould require a sharing of our professional decision-makilg powet with a heretofore por+*erless group, giving up much of the unage of ourselves as elite experts that we have worked so hard to achieve. Yet, the only true protection for children is empowerment. Until young people can sue, mo\pe out on, and say no to their abusers, neglecters, and exploiters, including those in child welfare agencies, the idea of children’s rights is only self-serving rhetoric. If our profession is truly committed to the liberation of oppressed and exploited groups, the choice seems clear. In discussing chilclren’s rights and what the relationship bet\veen adults ancl chilclren should be in our society, I think two
Social
Work
Ethics
and Children
325
points atxz par;ttnoitnt. First. f’t-ccclotn. choices. atitl clccisiotts sl~oulcl not be tar-cccl on children. hut t2thcr. \\.ltcther 01‘ not to exercise ftxxcloti~. choices. atici decisions should itselt‘ he iip to rtie child. No chilci stioulcl be placed in the position of Iia\.itig to choose it‘. iticleecl. he or she ~voctlcl tritli. rather iia\.e ;t clecisioti tnacle for hit11 01‘ her. I ;ini ~tticotiifot-tnl;le \\.itii the iclea of‘ adults usittj: childtx2ti to meet their needs. t>itt if 21child t’t-eel\, agrees to li\,e hith his ot- her parents and honor anti obey them until clcath do the!, pat-t, then that is the child’s right. The right to c/~oo.w to exercise one’s right to clioose shoLtIcl itself‘ be a choice. Second. one must learn to listen to chilclt-en and see the \vot-lcl t‘twtin their petxpecti\.e. Not onI\. t~etiietiit~et~ b.hat it bxs like b.Iieti rve i\we kick. because ive are not them. bitt txtliet,. listen. listcti. listen, anti cl0 it sotne more! I know tii;tn\~ social b.orket-s \vito tia\.e \vorketl \viLii kids tot- vears and never re;;II\, listenecl to them. xl\.itig instead 011 their o\\‘ti teelitigs almiit their- 0b.n ct~ilcltiootl or 011 ivtiat tmoks sa\’ kids should be like. In Iii)’ o\;.ti social \vork practice, I tia\,e askecl m\wlt’ \\.Ii\ so tii;iti\’ kids, rvilcll\. t-fhellious and defiant tob2rcl ati\. adult influence on their li\.es, Gill nevertheless spenci ati bout uti the sut)\\.a\. to cotne and see tile in tilb’ vcr\’ tt-aclitiotinl ofticc. sitting still tot- ati hour or tiiot‘e b.heti I c1Gti.t &.eti let them smoke. I think that these tough kids put up i\‘ith tile t)ecaitse I reall\~ heat. them. Equali~ itiipot-Lint, I resist the te*nptAtioti to impose tiiy aclitlt \2lue s).stetn on them. The stitciies of empath\,, both thcot-etical aticl ctnpit-id. detnonsttxte that \\.hat eliminates the possibilit)- of. ctnpathv is jitclgnietit. If b’e juclge kicls’ behavior that makes LIS itticotiit)t-tattle, ive cannot etnpathize h-ith them because kids sctisc that 1t.e are using them thr 21pw.er trip. imposing adult ~tliies aticl them. Jucl~tnent not onl\projecting our personal hi, ~~-LL~s onto pi-cclctcies etnpath!.. it also precipitates projectiGn. Kick can aticl cl0 speak for tliemselves. it’ I\-e Ict them. Sii~-\.e!-ing kicls is a start. Trvo sur\‘eys \\‘et-e concluctetl for this paper. The sitr\~e~~s \ver-e developed from the oher~xtioti that tii;iti\ of‘ the juveniles I iv;is seeing in tiiv practice had similar cotiiplaitits coticet-tiing chilcl \velktt-e set-\.ices the\. liacl I-ecei\,eci. I begati ititerviebitig chilclt-en and atlolescents specificall), to learn their espet-ietices ivitli the child svelfat-e s>3tetn. selecting subjects from tnk. o\\.ti ptxctice \vho hat1 I-epeatecil~~ espt-essecl *iegati\.eS\ie\\.s of child pr-otecti1.e w&l bwrkers eithet- \.el-balls or b\. asserting ttieil- rights to setG.ices Gv refusing to appear in it~tlepeticlence f‘rotii ptwtecti\.e court. not coopet-atitig in neglect or abuse investigations. assisting xutsetl atiults iti clisptw\~itig charges of‘ child al~usc, running ;t\\.;i~ t’t-on1 t-esicletitial placements. expressing anger to a social ivc,t.ker
326
E-OS
Social
Work
Ethics
327
and Children
social \\.ot-kers b’et-e not all ttegati\.e. even though their respottses I0 ttte siir\.e~. ma\. ha\.e been titociifiecl sonie\\.hat bv its ha\,itig been gi\.ctt bk- ‘2 so&d ~vorker. Sonte f’aith in atlulrs: appreciation o!‘ social b.ot-kers, aticl ~~aliie of‘ a traclitional cfepeticlettt li\itig arrangement b.ith caring adults k’ere espt-essed. in spite of’ the f’act rhat ui7’)’ /[u/f of‘ these adolescents b.ere, at the rinte of the slit-L-c\‘. Ii\ ittg 1)k.choice oittsicle rhc jurisdiction of parents and Pvelt,tre a&ticies. C~ottititetits ~~f‘ter&l 1,:. siir\.ey subjects during and at‘ter the sut-\.ek. suggest that much of the self-repot-ted delinquency of‘ these \.ouths is a response to percei\.ecl societal oppression. Ha\ing no icgal rights to control their o\~.n li\.es appears to pt-diice in sonit philosopti!~ justif\.itig giiel-illa attacks voitlhs a tiihilisric, anarchic and I against sk.tiibols of adult pob.er. ‘4 tew sattit;les illustrate, quote. \\?iat follo~vs is b.hat I coitld scribtdc dobx f‘rom b.hat the LitIs said. so I emphasize the language is theirs. not tttitie. Kids
;tw
ttle
Social
b.ot-ken
I nx
at
‘l‘tle the
otii\~ \\TI\.
tiigprs
in the
tiaw
no
the
top
b’ay
to teach
adults
of
shit 011
idea
III\.
~\w~-lci today. b.hat
class
Alults
h’e
bitt
cxil do.
I quit
to
01 pnize
(ttint) kids b2iit
po\vei-
other
kids
is to shit
to oil
quit. adtilts
kids.
.l‘tie most unselfish students are the most nclical. Schools just t>r;iinbxsti kids of their bxntiiig fr-eeclorri. I stcil to support myself ‘cause I +pt no legal ri$ts. ~l‘etliiig LIS\ve can‘t have ses is the \\x)rst. Kicts c‘;in ixdl:, fricti things up for- adults. \\‘e tieett to b.i-eck evetyttiitig till ~w\~ii-~ips lea\,e us atoile. I don’t gi\e ;i shit it’ you don’t like iti!. ‘fi)iiI Liitgiiage. (Iops hit first, ask questions later. \\‘hat 1 should cl0 and Ivhat I do at-e thw ctiftei.eiit things. In contrast. some sitrve!’ subjects said nothing other than to respond to die direct questions of the sur\.c\‘. .A ypiip of children 10 to 14 >.eat-s oi‘ age b’ere iti\.itetl to ;t round table discussion expressing their \,ieivs on the rights of chilare taken from their discussion dren. X‘he f~ollou~ing quotations (“Chilclren’s rights,” 1979). k~iil. age 10: I think the prot~leiti is that kids ax treated !\.itti 2 lot less value. Let’s 521~ . 300 year-s ago they used to play a valuable rote. .I‘he\b’el-e txisicall\~ ‘miniature adults . . the\. \\v~~lct go out atid help in the fields antI &It\. ~\x)i-k.~I‘ocla~ kids al-e &ilurtess. CVtint are kids? Cntil J.OLI are !?I \ OLI a& .just takin g inone\. t’ronn voiir parents mid that’s the hxx the\ lqin thinking ahut it and itie\- wstiit it. It sort of‘ starts the cii-cle.
328
Fox
Versus Empowerment
Jerry Fox
Evidence adolescents intrusi\-e, den\. the perceptions recognize ohm li\.es. the social abuse and
indicates that a grwing proportion of children 2nd experience tlaclitional child protective services as oppressive, and even esploitive. Professionals tend to realit!, that voungsters experience, project their ohm arid vulntrahilities onto >.oungsters, and refuse to the ahilit\~ and right of voungsters to control theit Enipob.etnient of nlinorr is an ethical obligation of h.orli profession and the only true protection froni neglect.
The inspiration for this paper comes from three sources: first, III!. o\vn experience as a survivor of child abuse; second. the esperiences of my daughter and foster son as victims of child abuse; and third, my paraprofessional ant1 professional practice l\,ith neglected ancl abused children and adolescents. The research for this paper is based on three sources: first, of my wm social work practice: second, t1t.o surve>‘s of recipients child welfare services, conducted over a period of 14 months, to learn their experiences as clients in the child ivelfare system; and third, an extensive re\.iew of historical, theoretical, empirical, and contemporary child r\.elfare literature. One of the obstacles to more responsi\,e services is the ten-
320
Fos
321
Social Work Ethics and Children
to 16. k\.ho are homeless, I QXS told that it is impossible fijr persons that age to be homeless because the law does not allow it. The normal child continues to be representeci in the professional literature as the one who does not question the labels, projections, illusions, and the surreal fantasy l\.orlcl professionals create for kids with their psychiatric mumbo-jumbo; i\.ho ne\.er myrt.s herself or himself in creating an alternative agenda of priorities ~\~hich clefme her or his OWR rwu& from a non-adult perspective; and rvho docilely cor~forv~ to the expectations of whatever adult services, programs, or centers happen to be fashionable that season. Some Consequences
of Child Oppression
There is some truth to the folk wisdom that if one tells a child something cannot be clone, then she or he is likely to try. it. \\‘e know that permissiveness builds self-cliscipline by de\,eloplng the child’s capacity for strengthening not only responsible clecisionmaking, but also coping skills and the ability to deal with the effects on others of those decisions (Xdams, 197 1). Permissiveness shoutcl uot be confused ivith letting children behave selfishI\,; rather, it is an approach that refuses to see the child as an object for adult gratification and, instead, emphasizes adult self-control and pro\.ision of a safe learning environment, i\.hile permitting the child to choose freely her or his own course of action i\.ithin the limits ot that environment. Of course, children need limits, and permissiveness ivithout limits neglects the child’s need to learn that there are ctfzcvzy limits in any interaction with other people in the environment. 1Vhen I practice permissiveness, \b.hat I’m cloing is riot abdicating III): adult responsibilitv but rather giving kids some control over their ~)xltl lives bv creaiing choices for them, within the limits of my resources, in a w.ay that socializes them to interact with other adults am~rti~vh, rather than submissively, and that prepares them to transfer that learning in order to seek other nonexploitative relationships ivith other adults. But in most interactions with adults, not only are children denied fundamental choices that affect their li\,es, their very ability to make those choices is denied. Denial of the ability to choose provides ad u I ts with an excuse to make all the child’s choices, from decisions as private and personal as choice of friends to decisions as public and political as w*ho will represent minors in Congress (Kodham, 1979, pp. 32-33). Deny a child some means of economic independence, ancl is it any 1%.oncler that most home burglaries are committed by children?
322
FOX
It hns long txcn ol~s~n~ctl 13:. soci;t! sc.ictltists that rlic ttiost rfpt.th,i\.t ar~t! rigid soc+eticb prodi~~v the ftighcst ptx~potT_iot~5 ot \.iolt’tlt. r!estrltcti\.c, :iriti a~ttttot-itat-iatl pctx~tialitics (Keic.!l, ICI7 I. !I. 11’). It is these aiitliot-it~ll.i~ltl !xtw)tl;klitics \\.I10 of‘tetl Ixcottlc tllc tlvxt gctict-;ttiotl t~f a!>u.set~s and opptxssot-s 01‘ c.!iilt!I-eti.
Lit!% I\-!>() take control of‘ their o~\‘tt :ti‘i\tit-s. irxtitnacics. idcnrilit-c. t‘roi-il ttl\’ ot)ser-uiiotl. inentall~~ 2nd etnotit5 . ;~tlcl socializatioti tiotiall\. tiealtlIicr t!iati ttiosc kids \\,lro ititct~ndlize cotif~otmit~.. ;tc‘c!uicscctice, alltl po\\Yt-lMl~ss. Being it, u)tlttx)! of‘ otit”s oi\.tf lifk is coi~itnotl!~~ xxcplv~! as ;t Critct.ioti ii)t- ~ii~rit~il !iealt!t. Espcriertce scr-Gtig zserri\.e. alienxtec! \-out11 sitggmts ttiat tlicit. tnosl prv\xletlt tiecd is for ctll!)o~\-eTtIlctIt. ot’ \.outig pwple might do tllLlc!l i.:nlf,o\~~et.ttletII to t-tY!ltcc tl1e tt~oit!)!t~g be!i;t~~iot- of‘p-ob.irlg tIutn!wt-s ot‘cf~ilttwt~ ant! ;tc!c~!e5c~etlts. Dettia! ot‘ pox\~et~ to minors txised upon assutnptions of‘ theititiuotnpcteticc t-ititis no suppor~l iti ct.trtyent ps~c!~olo~ic;tl t-cscxr-ctl. ;ttirl citt‘rvtit ps\~~!iological 1itcr;ttitt.c !)ro\.iclcs t;o c\,itltLtlc.c rll;t! >ICi ole4cetlts ;iqwl i4 to 13 \~c;it-5 ;tw tli~tit~g~tis!l;i!~le l‘rotn atlults \\.it!l ~x~s!xx~i to statittal-tls of.‘cc,rll!>etctl~c iti clecisiotl-nl~t~irIg !>t’(l(‘esse> ;tnd olltcotlle (.\leIton, I wi, I’]‘. 1 oo10 Ii. C:at!iei-ine Ross. .Assist;int I’r-ofes3ot~ of‘ Histon. at tile: Child St.itc!!, (Ienter of’ tile 1.21~ L:tli\.crsit!. School of‘ .\leclicitie. points out that et‘t’ot-ts to protect chiltlt-ct1 sttztn t‘t.otn im!~osition of. conscr\~;tti\c Ati~t’ri~;in mic!c!!e-class \aities atl(! ttlat the twttltirtg !cgis!atioti. ~t~llate\Yt- its statet! pill-!>osc. aims not to ;tssut-e t!lc essctiti;tl right< ot citizetlship !)t.tt t-attier to a!)t-ogatt2 t!:os;t rights (Ko45. 1
Social
b’ork
Ethics
and Children
323
trtciital Iicalrl~ pt.otessioital5 shoultl iw special I)rotectors ot. r-liiltlt-cati‘\ rights. at times the\ ha\e iiot seetltecl to t~itlltll ttii5 twlx)ithil)ilit\ LCI-\ \vcll. perhap c-c~titt~ihttit~ :< to the need f.0~ the ctiiltlt~et~‘~ t.ixtlts tito\tmtt’tlt. Kale petxeptiotib. theol-etical c)l-ietltation. extend pta5itws. p;titcit\ of atitl coti~plesit~~ ot‘ task at-e cotlsiclrtxxl ;I> sct~vices. contlict u,itti parents. txwotis. [I‘hcre is a] tieccl t’oi- the ptwtessic~t;al to lxke ;t htrotig ethic:tl position. goittg be!ot:tl ttxlitiottal guiclclittes. (p. 3 18) It is not safe to pr~esiitxe ttiat ct~ilrlreti Iia\,e intcixxts tllnt 31-c tut~inot~ioi~s b,ith those of their aclitlt carctakcr-s. \\.tiile \\.c continue to claim to Ix speaking /ot- chilclreti. u.e tia\,c been hrgelv i~ncot~ccl-nerl with the \ieh3 of‘ children and youth about ttiejr status. .\[eltoti (I !)SZ) suggests that “l>;\t.ticip~~tic)ti iii decisions coticet~t~it~~ them is is etliicall~~ aticl lepllb. petmiittctt. or even clen~a~ictecl, iii sotii~’ situations” (11. 537). X 14-l,eat,-old t,o!. n.110 li\,ecl on the streets ot‘ Se\\. I’ot-k Cit\once told tne that of all the people: \\.ho tucl at,itsecl aticl esploited him, social u~orkers nw-e the \\‘ot‘st. He \\‘ettt on to s;t\. that kids like hittiself n~lio are tit-d of atlults u.\iug tlietn. met call’ing it helping. t~t3A lllil’\‘Pt-\. not social ~\~ot~kers. I got tiim 21lar\~Vet. so he coltlcl sue sotilc 0F the adults, itictitding the social \\~orket-s iii pt~estigiouj agencies, b.110 had ken using him aticl ahsing tiini. legall>, anti othenvise. to nuke thetnsclves and their agencies look good. Because lie axis ;i tnitiol-, tiobic\.ct., no court \\.oiilcI accept his complaints n,ittiout still atiotliet. csploiti\,e agencv and ahiisi\r acldt ititniclin~ on his life. a cotictitioti ttlat in no itncexiin terms tie flatI:, rejected. I’hus, b.tiile tie tried to etiiploy legal tiieans to obtain legal ~jctstice fat- tiiniselt‘, the legal s>xetii clenlanclect that tie submit to still more injustice hefore the\, h~oulc\ e\‘ctl listen to him. Getting ;t‘l;i~~~ver Cot- this 1x11~\\x one of the tiiox clangel-oiis Il’otd leaId to ;1 large professional ititen.entions of‘ III!’ career. public child pi-otecti\.c agctlcv , that this t>o\. intended to file child ser&use and kictnappitig dial-:ges against sotii~ of their protective \.ice staff’. and suclclenl\~ both tii\’ client aticl I fo~incl ourscl\.es folI0b.d t)y detectives. ;\ social \;.ork colleague itit’ormecl tile of ;I t‘utnor that kicltiapping charges h.et‘e being prepared against tne tot- ha\.ing seen the boy pi-ofessiotiall~~ b.ithottt the permission of some ofticial b.tio had never e\‘en met the voutti. Finallv, the ho\\\.a imprisoned for 1‘L months ancl then t’eleasecl txd onto thk streets xvhere he continues to 1iL.e. I b,ill relate ;t f‘ut-her, eqiiall~~ shockin g csatllpl’ ftull 111v (>\\‘I1 practice. TIVO I,rothel-s. aged 9 and 1 I \‘eat-s, h’f2t.e clisco\.ereci to he
324
Fox
having sesual relations with each other in a chilclren’s summer camp i\.here I servecl as clinical director. Upon hearing this, the state’s clepartment of children and families services sent a carload of in\.estigators ancl social tvorkers to the camp. FL’ithout so much as having met the two bovs, these officials presented the executive clirector ancl me \\.ith plans to immediate? hospitalize both brothers in separate long-term psychiatric hospitals, terminate the custocl!. of the brothers’ parents to all five of their children without a hearing, suspencl our entire chilcl care staff pencling extensive FBI background in\,estigations, and prosecute phantom adults presumed to be “turnirfg these young children into psychosexual deviates.” The plan also mcludecl daily anal penetration, F\-hat I call rape, to cletermine if any of our children were being anally penetrated. These officials were astonished at my suggestion that someone should interview the brothers before anv action was taken. Having done so, I referred the boys to our reg’ional mental health center ancl chilcl guidance clinic for extensive further interviews and testing, which established clearly that there was no rational basis for anv of the state’s plans. With the help of the staff at the center and .’ . chmc, we convmced them that the brothers’ right to refuse unwarranted and unwanted assaults on their lives by well-meaning but misguided professionals should be respected, and the embarrassecl of‘ficials returned to their offices. The ethics of our profession as social workers demand that we commit our professional resources to the empotverment of out stanclients. Huey Newton writes, “We are asking for a ‘human dard to arm kids with, within tvhich we as adults can deai with out own problems and uptighteclness bvhile kids are free to cletermine their own lives” (cited in Moocher, 1976, p. 2). Empowering children would require our profession to take more sur%~~tslvand more literally its code of ethics. It would require a radical overhaul of naive, outdated, simplistic, and self-serving conceptions of childhood and adolescence. Most difficult of all, It ivould require a sharing of our professional decision-makilg powet with a heretofore por+*erless group, giving up much of the unage of ourselves as elite experts that we have worked so hard to achieve. Yet, the only true protection for children is empowerment. Until young people can sue, mo\pe out on, and say no to their abusers, neglecters, and exploiters, including those in child welfare agencies, the idea of children’s rights is only self-serving rhetoric. If our profession is truly committed to the liberation of oppressed and exploited groups, the choice seems clear. In discussing chilclren’s rights and what the relationship bet\veen adults ancl chilclren should be in our society, I think two
Social
Work
Ethics
and Children
325
points atxz par;ttnoitnt. First. f’t-ccclotn. choices. atitl clccisiotts sl~oulcl not be tar-cccl on children. hut t2thcr. \\.ltcther 01‘ not to exercise ftxxcloti~. choices. atici decisions should itselt‘ he iip to rtie child. No chilci stioulcl be placed in the position of Iia\.itig to choose it‘. iticleecl. he or she ~voctlcl tritli. rather iia\.e ;t clecisioti tnacle for hit11 01‘ her. I ;ini ~tticotiifot-tnl;le \\.itii the iclea of‘ adults usittj: childtx2ti to meet their needs. t>itt if 21child t’t-eel\, agrees to li\,e hith his ot- her parents and honor anti obey them until clcath do the!, pat-t, then that is the child’s right. The right to c/~oo.w to exercise one’s right to clioose shoLtIcl itself‘ be a choice. Second. one must learn to listen to chilclt-en and see the \vot-lcl t‘twtin their petxpecti\.e. Not onI\. t~etiietiit~et~ b.hat it bxs like b.Iieti rve i\we kick. because ive are not them. bitt txtliet,. listen. listcti. listen, anti cl0 it sotne more! I know tii;tn\~ social b.orket-s \vito tia\.e \vorketl \viLii kids tot- vears and never re;;II\, listenecl to them. xl\.itig instead 011 their o\\‘ti teelitigs almiit their- 0b.n ct~ilcltiootl or 011 ivtiat tmoks sa\’ kids should be like. In Iii)’ o\;.ti social \vork practice, I tia\,e askecl m\wlt’ \\.Ii\ so tii;iti\’ kids, rvilcll\. t-fhellious and defiant tob2rcl ati\. adult influence on their li\.es, Gill nevertheless spenci ati bout uti the sut)\\.a\. to cotne and see tile in tilb’ vcr\’ tt-aclitiotinl ofticc. sitting still tot- ati hour or tiiot‘e b.heti I c1Gti.t &.eti let them smoke. I think that these tough kids put up i\‘ith tile t)ecaitse I reall\~ heat. them. Equali~ itiipot-Lint, I resist the te*nptAtioti to impose tiiy aclitlt \2lue s).stetn on them. The stitciies of empath\,, both thcot-etical aticl ctnpit-id. detnonsttxte that \\.hat eliminates the possibilit)- of. ctnpathv is jitclgnietit. If b’e juclge kicls’ behavior that makes LIS itticotiit)t-tattle, ive cannot etnpathize h-ith them because kids sctisc that 1t.e are using them thr 21pw.er trip. imposing adult ~tliies aticl them. Jucl~tnent not onl\projecting our personal hi, ~~-LL~s onto pi-cclctcies etnpath!.. it also precipitates projectiGn. Kick can aticl cl0 speak for tliemselves. it’ I\-e Ict them. Sii~-\.e!-ing kicls is a start. Trvo sur\‘eys \\‘et-e concluctetl for this paper. The sitr\~e~~s \ver-e developed from the oher~xtioti that tii;iti\ of‘ the juveniles I iv;is seeing in tiiv practice had similar cotiiplaitits coticet-tiing chilcl \velktt-e set-\.ices the\. liacl I-ecei\,eci. I begati ititerviebitig chilclt-en and atlolescents specificall), to learn their espet-ietices ivitli the child svelfat-e s>3tetn. selecting subjects from tnk. o\\.ti ptxctice \vho hat1 I-epeatecil~~ espt-essecl *iegati\.eS\ie\\.s of child pr-otecti1.e w&l bwrkers eithet- \.el-balls or b\. asserting ttieil- rights to setG.ices Gv refusing to appear in it~tlepeticlence f‘rotii ptwtecti\.e court. not coopet-atitig in neglect or abuse investigations. assisting xutsetl atiults iti clisptw\~itig charges of‘ child al~usc, running ;t\\.;i~ t’t-on1 t-esicletitial placements. expressing anger to a social ivc,t.ker
326
E-OS
Social
Work
Ethics
327
and Children
social \\.ot-kers b’et-e not all ttegati\.e. even though their respottses I0 ttte siir\.e~. ma\. ha\.e been titociifiecl sonie\\.hat bv its ha\,itig been gi\.ctt bk- ‘2 so&d ~vorker. Sonte f’aith in atlulrs: appreciation o!‘ social b.ot-kers, aticl ~~aliie of‘ a traclitional cfepeticlettt li\itig arrangement b.ith caring adults k’ere espt-essed. in spite of’ the f’act rhat ui7’)’ /[u/f of‘ these adolescents b.ere, at the rinte of the slit-L-c\‘. Ii\ ittg 1)k.choice oittsicle rhc jurisdiction of parents and Pvelt,tre a&ticies. C~ottititetits ~~f‘ter&l 1,:. siir\.ey subjects during and at‘ter the sut-\.ek. suggest that much of the self-repot-ted delinquency of‘ these \.ouths is a response to percei\.ecl societal oppression. Ha\ing no icgal rights to control their o\~.n li\.es appears to pt-diice in sonit philosopti!~ justif\.itig giiel-illa attacks voitlhs a tiihilisric, anarchic and I against sk.tiibols of adult pob.er. ‘4 tew sattit;les illustrate, quote. \\?iat follo~vs is b.hat I coitld scribtdc dobx f‘rom b.hat the LitIs said. so I emphasize the language is theirs. not tttitie. Kids
;tw
ttle
Social
b.ot-ken
I nx
at
‘l‘tle the
otii\~ \\TI\.
tiigprs
in the
tiaw
no
the
top
b’ay
to teach
adults
of
shit 011
idea
III\.
~\w~-lci today. b.hat
class
Alults
h’e
bitt
cxil do.
I quit
to
01 pnize
(ttint) kids b2iit
po\vei-
other
kids
is to shit
to oil
quit. adtilts
kids.
.l‘tie most unselfish students are the most nclical. Schools just t>r;iinbxsti kids of their bxntiiig fr-eeclorri. I stcil to support myself ‘cause I +pt no legal ri$ts. ~l‘etliiig LIS\ve can‘t have ses is the \\x)rst. Kicts c‘;in ixdl:, fricti things up for- adults. \\‘e tieett to b.i-eck evetyttiitig till ~w\~ii-~ips lea\,e us atoile. I don’t gi\e ;i shit it’ you don’t like iti!. ‘fi)iiI Liitgiiage. (Iops hit first, ask questions later. \\‘hat 1 should cl0 and Ivhat I do at-e thw ctiftei.eiit things. In contrast. some sitrve!’ subjects said nothing other than to respond to die direct questions of the sur\.c\‘. .A ypiip of children 10 to 14 >.eat-s oi‘ age b’ere iti\.itetl to ;t round table discussion expressing their \,ieivs on the rights of chilare taken from their discussion dren. X‘he f~ollou~ing quotations (“Chilclren’s rights,” 1979). k~iil. age 10: I think the prot~leiti is that kids ax treated !\.itti 2 lot less value. Let’s 521~ . 300 year-s ago they used to play a valuable rote. .I‘he\b’el-e txisicall\~ ‘miniature adults . . the\. \\v~~lct go out atid help in the fields antI &It\. ~\x)i-k.~I‘ocla~ kids al-e &ilurtess. CVtint are kids? Cntil J.OLI are !?I \ OLI a& .just takin g inone\. t’ronn voiir parents mid that’s the hxx the\ lqin thinking ahut it and itie\- wstiit it. It sort of‘ starts the cii-cle.
328
Fox