Theoretical Perspectives and Conceptualization of Violence and Abuse, A case study of Evelyn

Introduction

Intimate partner violence is a common experience for many women around the world and has been a major problem faced by community social workers from time immemorial. However, to understand its causes and formulate various remedies to it, researchers have made reference to various concepts and theories. This paper seeks to do exactly that. It aims to use various theories and concepts to analyse a case study of Evelyn, a woman that has faced various instances of partner violence. In doing so, the paper will analyse the personal, cultural, and structural factors that impact on Evelyn’s situation while making reference to specific concepts and theories.

Understanding Different Forms and Effects of Violence

Evelyn’s case reveals that there are different forms and effects of violence and abuse that women face from their partners. But first, according to Humphrey & Thiara (2003), violence can be defined as the use of force or power against oneself, another individual or against a community which results into physical, emotional or psychological harm, deprivation or maldevelopment – although one can be subjected to more than one form. Hence, violence can be categorised into physical violence, sexual exploitation or abuse, neglect, financial or economic abuse, emotional abuse, intimidation, spiritual abuse, social abuse, harassment, or interpersonal abuse, among others. Mechanic et al (2008) point out that physical abuse involves the use of physical force to harm someone, for example, restraining, kicking, slapping, shouting, or even the most common one – beating. Indeed, based on her narration, Evelyn has experienced some forms of physical violence that are worth noting. For instance, she mentions that even though she loves his partner David, their relationship has not been smooth because sometimes he used to hit her and that scares her a bit.

Apart from physical abuse, Evelyn also mentions that she has been experiencing neglect. According to Thompson (2012), neglect is a form of abuse that involves repeated incidences of an adult or child failing to be provided with whatever they need for emotional, physical or psychological development, such as failing to get food, shelter, clothing medical care, protection from harm, or not just being loved. Considering Evelyn’s case, there are various instances of neglect that can be pointed out. For instance, she has been experiencing neglect from her own mum and sister, who do not want anything to do with her ever since she got engaged in drugs. As a result, she has had problems with shelter and has been unable to secure good shelter of her own and for her kids.

Evelyn has also been subjected to several instances of emotional abuse. First, Mechanic et al (2008) define emotional abuse as the practice of subjecting an individual to the risk of serious mental disorder through a verbal attack by calling them names, yelling, criticising, or abusing them. Mechanic et al (2008) also argue that emotional abuse exists in the form of dominating someone by exploiting them, intimidation, social isolation, verbal threats, stalking, or criminally harassment. Evelyn’s case reveals several instances of emotional abuse, perpetrated by the people around her. For instance, she has been socially isolated from her son James, whom she is no longer in custody of because the school raised concerns over her ability to care for him. Besides, while explaining her release from prison, she mentions that whereas she would like her partner to come to pick her from prison, she knows from experience that her partner sometimes yells at her, and she at some point seemed to be disturbed while talking about how her partner gets abusive to her. Evelyn also felt emotionally disturbed when she realized that after spending some time in jail, her daughter could not recognize her, and was scared upon seeing her. Having identified various forms and effects of abuse, the next section of the essay looks at levels at which violence can be enacted upon an individual or other ideas or practices that can be categorised as abusive – with specific reference to Evelyn’s story.

Abusive Ideas, Practices, and Systems

The aforementioned forms of violence are usually experienced at the individual or interpersonal level. However, existing literature on violence and abuse also reveals that there are structural, cultural, social and political ideas/practices that effect can also be classified as oppressive or abusive. For instance, Weiss-Gal et al (2014) argue that socially oppressing and discriminating deprived social groups provides an opportunity for the privileged social groups to dominate over their unprivileged counterparts and this embodies a real form of abuse and violence in the society.

While one may argue that social stratification only contributes to negative effects and not really violence and abuse, Allan et al (2009) opine that much of the debate about social stratification and its effects relies more on the definition and conceptualization of violence or abuse. Whereas not all definitions of violence may allow for a contextual understanding of what violence really is, it is possible to extrapolate that social stratification has an abusive effect on people’s emotional well-being. In fact, according to Allan et al (2009), a similar extrapolation can be made in the case of structural and systematic forms of abuse such as depriving a person’s basic rights of life, denying them necessary resources for living a psychologically or physiologically sustainable life, or simply disempowering them.

In Evelyn’s case, there are several instances that her access to basic rights of life has been denied. For instance, her son, James, had been taken out of her care base on speculations that she could not properly take care of her. While this could have been a proper justification before she went in custody, it would be unfair to still deny her the right and liberty to reunite with her son after her release from prison, especially considering that prison is corrective and meant to teach individuals how to be responsible in the society.

By virtue of being a woman, she is bestowed the responsibility of taking care of the baby while her partner is at work (typically how a patriarchal society works). But this does not go well with her due to her baby’s stubbornness. While it is expected that she would some help from her husband, the cultural and societal norms require that she takes care of the baby and household by herself, owing to cultural roles in the society where the father is the provider while the mother is the caretaker (Clark et al, 2017).

Having identified the social and cultural systems that breed violence and abuse, the next section evaluates the conceptual and theoretical understandings of violence and abuse that may be a target of goals and principles of social work practice.

Theoretical and Conceptual Understanding of Abuse and Violence

The Feminist Theory

From an analytic point of view, there are various theoretical standpoints through which we can confirm if Evelyn is experiencing violence, and further elucidate why she might be experiencing such violence. For instance, the feminism theory has largely been used by researchers to explain how power and the effects of power loss can contribute to an experience of abuse and violence through loss of control.

Historically, the feminist theory emerged in the 1700s when scholars started to make publications that sought to advocate for the right of women in society (Truth, 2005). Particularly, one such publication is the “Vindication of the Rights of Woman” written by Mary Wollstonecraft and “The Changing Woman” – a Najavo myth that allegedly gave credit to a woman who in the end populated the world (Anthony, 2005).

Nonetheless, the feminist theory is an extension of feminism into the fictional, philosophical and theoretical discourse in an attempt to understand gender inequality (Moi, 2002). According to Worrell & Johnson (1997), it explores themes such as oppression, stereotyping, discrimination, power and patriarchy; to explain gender inequality and female experiences of the same.

Having said that, feminist theorists who focus on gender inequality believe that women’s experience of and location in the society is not only different from that of men but also unequal to men’s (Anthony, 2005). Besides, according to Mitchell (1975), feminists argue that despite women having the same capacity of moral reasoning as men, patriarchy, has, from time immemorial denied women the opportunity to express this reasoning. Beforehand, patriarchy is a term used to describe a social system organized around the father rule i.e. where males primarily have authority and domination (French, 1985). Ultimately, when women are denied the opportunity to express their reasoning in the society, they are by default shoved into a private sphere of the household, where they are excluded from the full participation in public life. According to Crawford & Unger (2000), liberal feminists also argue that women in heterosexual marriage experience gender inequality and do not gain any benefit from such relationships, thereby explaining why married women are more stressed up that married men and unmarried women.

On the other hand, feminists who focus on gender oppression believe that women are not only different and unequal to men but are also actively subordinated, abused and even oppressed by men (Clark et al, 2017). According to Truth (2005), feminist theories on gender oppression are grounded on power and power imbalance between men and women, thereby arguing that whereas it is good to be a woman, patriarchy does not acknowledge this goodness and therefore awards men more power to oppress women. Nonetheless, the theorists also believe that abuse is a fundamental element of patriarchy, although the also opine that abuse can be defeated when women begin to recognise their strength and value, as well as when they give a critical confrontation to oppression.

In this paper, we draw on the work of feminist theorists to make an argument that Evelyn, in various instances, experienced violence and oppression, and that lack of power and control within the context of patriarchy exposed her to abuse from her husband. Feminist’s emphasis on gender inequality perpetrated through oppression, discrimination, power and patriarchy as contributors to gender abuse and violence is especially useful in the analysis of Evelyn’s situation; as it allows us to think through how being denied access to her son, being hit around by her partner, receiving verbal abuse and oppression from her partner both physically and on phone, and being blamed by her partner for not feeling well – confirms that she is indeed experiencing violence and abuse. To this end, feminists’ conceptualization of women being denied the opportunity to express their reasoning in the society is generative in understanding why Evelyn is shoved to the private sphere of the household, forcing her to single-handedly care for her child even when she does not like it. It is here that feminists’ attention to patriarchy and how it contributes to violence and abuse against women is of value for informing why action should have been taken against Evelyn’s partner for hitting her, and why taking action against him could have prevented further escalation of violence against her by her partner.

The Practice of Critical Social Work and the Feminist Theory

Having explored of the feminist theory as a conceptual and theoretical framework for understanding violence and abuse, we now intend to test whether it aligns with the goals and foundations of critical social work (CSW) practice – as hinted by scholars such as Mendes (2009). But first, Weiss-Gal et al (2014) define critical social work as a way of evaluating how power is constructed, reproduced and used. From a historical perspective, critical social work emerged from anti-racist, feminist and Marxist ideas until in the 1990s when scholars attempted to integrate it with some post-modernism ideas (Allan et al, 2009). According to Weiss-Gal et al (2014), CWS is used as an alternative to the traditional mainstream social theory with a major interest in emancipating the oppressed and enabling the oppressed groups to use their power. Consequently, CWS had been unpopular with some social workers particularly due to its collectivist orientation and the manner in which criticises tinkering with authority as a strategy that will never bring a solution to the oppressed (Weiss-Gal et al, 2014).

One of the major goals of CWS is to see every individual within the broader cultural, economic, social and environmental context; thereby evaluating personal experience from a broader perspective of social structures and inequalities (Allan et al, 2009). To some extent, this goal is aligned to the feminist theory because as highlighted before, feminist theorists evaluate violence from the perspective of exclusion and discrimination on the basis of economic and structural inequality, power, oppression, and stereotypes. In short, just like a critical social worker would analyse Evelyn’s experience of violence and abuse through the cultural aspect of patriarchy, a feminist would do the same.

Understanding Violence and Abuse – The Intersectionality Theory

Having understood the meaning and origin of critical social work, there is a need to understand how key critical social work ideas about violence can be used to address gender and power. In doing so, one idea that scholars have popularly used is the theory of intersectionality. According to Thompson (2012), the theory of intersectionality posits that there exists a relationship between social inequalities that recognizes the intersection of identity categories constitutes new forms of violence and abuse and shapes responses and needs.

Ideally, intersectionality enables social workers to critically approach abuse and violence and is an essential tool for the development of advocacy policies that address various forms of abuse, discrimination and violence in the contemporary society (Mehrotra, 2010). The theory posits that inequalities are not as a result of a single factor, but rather a function of a multiplicity of factors such as gender, race, and class. Therefore, intersectionality theorists insist that violence exists at a personal, cultural and structural level. It is, therefore, possible to use the intersectionality theory to analyze Evelyn’s experiences of violence and abuse as a function of a diversity of cultural, structural and personal factors, thereby understanding the specific locations where her experiences of abuse and violence emanate from.

Personal

From the personal perspective, Evelyn’s gender as a female has largely contributed to her experiences of violence and abuse from her husband as had been argued from the patriarchy perspective. As a woman, she has to maintain her relationship with her family no matter how much violence and abuse she faces from her partner. She is also facing some social abuse out of her daughter not recognizing her as her mother after staying in prison for a long period of time – this is evident in the way she cries while explaining this point. Her health condition, having multiple sclerosis has also exposed her to social abuse, because as she narrates, her partner is not okay with it and blames her for not feeling well. Besides, because of the disease, she does not feel well when around people, hence she is socially secluded.

Cultural

Evelyn’s violence and abuse experiences have partly been contributed by cultural factors. For example, she mentions how her mother and her sister do not want anything to do with her due to her involvement with drugs. She is seemingly rejected by her family as a result of engaging in drugs – a phenomenon which is culturally perceived to be wrong.

Structural

Lastly, Evelyn’s experience of economic abuse i.e. not being able to secure a decent housing of benefits from government agencies is attributable to structural factors. According to Truth (2005), a person’s access to structural resources and support determines their sense of agency and this enables them to gain control while securing their safety and well-being. Bust Evelyn has not been able to access such support or resources, and therefore she is not in control of her life and well-being, she is therefore vulnerable to abuse and violence.

Therefore, we draw from the theory of intersectionality to make an argument that oppression occurs at cultural, personal structural levels, and the levels are mutually inclusive. The intersectionality’s emphasis on a personal, cultural and structural model is useful to the analysis of Evelyn’s experience of violence and abuse as it allows the understanding of her gender, health condition, indulgence in drugs and financial constraints contribute to her abuse.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the intersectionality theory emerges as an important tool for understanding how the society should address existing inequalities so as to eradicate power imbalance between male and female, thereby addressing the issue of violence and abuse. Besides, intersectionality enables social workers to address the issue of violence and abuse from a multiplicity of perspectives (i.e. personal, cultural and structural) to enable a comprehensive approach in developing solutions to violence and abuse.

References

• Allan, J, Briskman, L. & Pease, B (Eds.) 2009, Critical social work: Theories and practices for a socially just world, (2nd ed.), Allen & Unwin Crows Nest, NSW.
• Anthony B. (2005) "Speech After Arrest for Illegal Voting". Feminist Theory: A Reader. 2nd Ed. Edited by Kolmar, Wendy and Bartowski, Frances. New York: McGraw-Hill. 91-95.
• Crawford, M. & Unger, R. (2000). Women and Gender: A feminist psychology (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.
• Clark, K. A., Mays, V. M., & Cochran, S. D. (2017). Extreme violence and the invisibility of women who murder: the intersectionality of gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and gender identity equals silence. Violence and gender, 4(4), 117-120.
• French M. (1985) Beyond Power: On Women, Men, and Morals. New York.
• Humphreys & Thiara (2003) Mental health and domestic violence: ‘I call it symptoms of abuse’ https://rl.talis.com/3/deakin/items/6514A66B-6ED1-4CB0-3B82-43C5B41C8730.html?lang=en-US&login=1 [Accessed on 25th March 2019].
• Mittwoch U. (1988). "The race to be male". New Scientist. 120 (1635): 38–42.
• Mechanic, Weaver & Patricia (2008) Mental health consequences of intimate partner abuse: A multidimensional assessment of four different forms of abuse https://rl.talis.com/3/deakin/items/E770C665-6AD3-5274-04F2-B43A8FCC63B4.html?lang=en-US&login=1 [Accessed on 25th March 2019]
• Moi T. (2002) Sexual/Textual Politics Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-28012-9
• Mitchell J. (1975) Psychoanalysis and Feminism: Freud, Reich, Laing, and Women. New York.
• Mendes, P. (2009). Tracing the origins of critical social work practice. In J. Allan, L. Briskman, & B. Pease, (Eds.), Critical social work: Theories and practices for a socially just world, (pp. 17–29). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen &Unwin.
• Mechanic, Weaver & Patricia (2008) Mental health consequences of intimate partner abuse: A multidimensional assessment of four different forms of abuse https://rl.talis.com/3/deakin/items/E770C665-6AD3-5274-04F2-B43A8FCC63B4.html?lang=en-US&login=1 [Accessed on 25th March 2019].
• Mehrotra, G. (2010), Toward a Continuum of Intersectionality Theorizing for Feminist Social Work Scholarship, Affilia, vol.25, no. 4, pp. 417-430.intersectionality and feminist social work scholarship.
• Thompson (2012) The theory base in anti-discriminatory practice: Equality, diversity and social justice, pp. 26-54. https://rl.talis.com/3/deakin/items/05A2BC99-E49D-810E-BD19-274C471F2615.html?lang=en-US&login=1 [Accessed on 25th March 2019].
• Truth S. (2005). "Ain't I a Woman". Feminist Theory: A Reader. 2nd Ed. Edited by Kolmar, Wendy and Bartowski, Frances. New York: McGraw-Hill 79.
• Worell and N. Johnson (1997) (eds.) Shaping the future of feminist psychology: Education, research, and practice (Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp.15-35.
• Weiss-Gal, Levin & Krumer-Nevo (2014), Applying critical social work in direct practice with families, Child & Family Social Work, vol.19:1, pp. 55-84.