Author: AWARE Media

Enhance police skills in sexual assault cases

From Sumedha Jalote, Communications Executive, Association of Women for Action & Research

police1The recent Committee of Inquiry and subsequent public discussions have addressed the possibility of enhancing Singapore’s police capability in areas requiring specialised skills, including by drawing on international experience. (“Overseas protest training for the police?”; July 21)

Sexual assault cases would be one area that may benefit from lessons in international best practice.

Through our Sexual Assault Care Centre (SACC), the Association of Women for Action and Research works with women who experience sexual assault, providing legal advice and therapeutic support, as well as accompanying victims who are navigating medical, police and legal processes.

Making a report is onerous. For six months to two years, victims undergo long interviews, repeating details of their assaults to multiple officers.

Research shows and our experience confirms that the responses of the police and other agencies can have a substantial impact on victim recovery. If a victim is not treated with due sensitivity, this can worsen trauma and slow down recovery.

If victims feel uncomfortable with the police, they may be hesitant to describe their experiences in detail or may even discontinue reports. This can hamper the ability of the police to gather evidence to hold perpetrators accountable. Thus, many police forces have specialised procedures and training to ensure a victim-centric approach to sexual assault. The Sapphire unit in London is “committed to ensuring that victims of sexual crime are treated with care and respect”.

The Singapore Police Force already has a specialised unit, the Serious Sexual Crime Branch (SSCB), and could consider this approach.

The police could refer all sexual assault cases immediately to the SSCB or designate specific police stations to handle such cases and provide all personnel there with advanced training.

Most victims’ first contact would now be with police officers who have not received specialised training for sexual assault. If it is not feasible to ensure that victims’ first contact is with specialists, the police should train all officers and counter staff to respond to an initial report in a sensitive, victim-centric manner before referring the case to centres with advanced training.

In New Zealand, Canada and the United Kingdom, a social worker or trained volunteer often accompanies victims through medical examinations, police interviews and court processes. In Singapore, only SACC clients typically benefit from such support. To enhance victims’ experiences of the legal system, the police could consider making immediate referrals to social workers for all sexual assault cases or developing similar services of their own.

Increased training and sensitivity, as well as greater resources for victims, would encourage more people to report their experiences and provide the support needed to heal from their trauma.

This letter was first published in TODAY on 26 July 2014.

Support parents rather than romanticise parenthood

By Jolene Tan, Programmes and Communications Senior Manager, Association of Women for Action and Research

Last Friday’s commentary (“For many, parenthood is one part blessing and one part trauma”) was refreshingly honest about the experience of parenthood.

familyToo often, new parents feel unable to openly discuss the difficulties they face in coping with the enormous transformation in their lives. There is tremendous social pressure to express only positive sentiments about having children.

Parents may see negative feelings as reasons for guilt and shame, as well as fear of judgment about not loving their children enough.

However, it is ordinary for any parent to sometimes feel ambivalent about parenthood, and to experience unhappiness, boredom or frustration from time to time. These feelings reflect the fact that parenting, like all caregiving, is hard work.

Women face especially intense and potentially damaging societal expectations to be “perfect mothers”, who sacrifice without complaint.

An Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) survey of more than 1,300 individuals found that most people – especially male respondents – see childcare as primarily the responsibility of women.

According to Manpower Ministry statistics, 43 per cent of women who are economically inactive cite domestic responsibilities as the main reason for not being formally employed, compared with only 1.8 per cent of men.

Ironically, placing the idea of motherhood on a pedestal can undermine the actual needs of real mothers for practical support. Other people may assume that women “naturally” know how to take care of children. This puts undue pressure on new mothers to automatically “get it right” through “maternal instinct”.

In fact, childcare, like all labour, involves a learning curve and the acquisition of skills and knowledge with experience. All caregivers, regardless of gender, go through this process, and need the material and emotional support of family, friends and society in general.

Unrealistic romanticism about motherhood also pressures women to deny that they have needs and aspirations that can conflict with the demands of caregiving. Women may feel guilty about the desire to have time and energy for other pursuits, including their own relaxation and hobbies.

We support the call for greater kindness and understanding towards caregivers. Society needs to recognise that caregiving work is not just for mothers – it should be shared. Policies can encourage this by expanding gender-neutral parental leave entitlements, doing more to financially support caregivers, and recognising the need for all employees to access flexible work arrangements.

This letter was first published in the Straits Times Forum on 11 July 2014.

离婚 互助小组

hands你是否因为离婚而感到孤单与无助,甚至觉得似乎是自己一个人在面对离婚所带来的冲击与挣扎?

这是一个为已经离婚和正在办理离婚手续的女性朋友设立的互助小组。希望通过小组辅导,帮助参加者在面对离婚带来的种种变化与冲击时,最终拨云见日,走出阴霾.

希望藉这互助小组為离婚妇女提供一个安全的环境,让彼此抒发内心创痛的同时,也互相学习如何克服负面情绪,如何面对离婚后生活的改变,进而独立重建新生活。

對象: 离婚1-2年和正在办离婚手续的女性朋友。

地点:妇女行动与研究协会(AWARE) Blk 5, Dover Crescent, #01-22, Singapore 130005 Tel: 6779 7137

欢迎你参加我们的互助小组,让大家以积极,成熟的心态面对离婚所带来的冲击;并学习各种方法与知识来适应离婚后生活的节奏与变化,积极地向新的生活迈进。

欲知更多有关互助小组的详情或有意参加的朋友,请联络 Siang Hui, 或是电邮到以下邮址sianghui@aware.org.sg

Women’s right to refuse

By Kokila Annamalai

On May 23, Elliot Rodger went on a killing spree in Isla Vista, California, that was motivated by the desire to punish women for rejecting him.

While many in the international community have condemned his actions, some men on social media responded with empathy for Rodger and a certain understanding of his sentiments.

A group of men went further to start a Facebook group to hero-worship Rodger.

On June 16, University of Washington student Keshav Bhide was arrested for claiming to be “the next Elliot Rodger” and threatening to murder women.

He claimed everything Rodger did was justified and publicly praised the latter’s actions. These men not only defend Rodger’s actions, but relate to his anger towards women who rejected him.

Their anger in response to sexual rejection hints at a perceived right to have sex with the women they desire and a denial of women’s right to refuse.

While some have blamed Rodger’s mental health issues for his actions, it is clear from the support of some men and the many such stories of men’s violence in reaction to women’s sexual rejection — collected by online campaign When Women Refuse — that Rodger’s attitude towards women is not a psychological problem, but a social one.

Women around the world experience violence when they reject men’s sexual advances. Why?

A recent United Nations survey of 10,000 men in Asia and the Pacific found that nearly half of the men interviewed reported using physical or sexual violence against a female partner and nearly a quarter admitted to rape.

The most common motivation that men cited for rape was sexual entitlement — a belief that they have a right to sex with women regardless of consent. In short, women are seen as not having the right to say no to sex.

Singapore, too, has seen incidents of women being attacked for rejecting men.

Recently, a man reportedly threw alcohol and smashed a glass into the face of a woman who ignored his advances at a club in Clarke Quay.

Readers’ comments in response to news reports of the incident included those that said the victim must have been out in Clarke Quay because she was desperate for sex and that she should have “use (sic) more EQ if she intend (sic) to reject him”.

When women are raped or sexually assaulted, they are often told they should have said no more assertively or fought off the perpetrator. They are blamed for sending mixed signals or not doing enough to stop the rape.

Yet, when women are attacked for rejecting sexual advances, they are told they should have been more polite or tactful about it.

This is a clear case of “damned if you do, damned if you don’t”. These victim-blaming attitudes excuse men’s sexual violence as uncontrollable, reinforcing their sense of sexual entitlement.

Right to choose

Male sexual entitlement is perpetuated through mainstream media, where men are regularly shown responding to women’s rejection with anger and violence.

In Singapore, it is also perpetuated through the law, which gives men immunity when they force their wives to have sex, unless the couple are living apart or a Personal Protection Order has been started or obtained prior to the incident.

The masculine rhetoric of sex as conquest, rather than as an experience shared by two consenting adults, diminishes women’s right to say no.

When male sexual aggression is portrayed as an acceptable way of flirting or engaging in sex, rather than as harassment or violence, women are not safe when they reject men.

Sex education must focus on the importance of consent and the right of everyone to say no without fear of repercussion.

Language such as “giving in” or “putting out” in reference to women consenting to intercourse reduces their role in sex to submission, rather than active participation.

All of us have a right to choose whom we have sex with. Women’s sexual desires and choices are as important as men’s.

Fixating on Rodger’s psyche or that of the men who commit violence against women draws attention away from underlying social norms and power structures that contribute to such violence.

Men should not have to prove their masculinity by committing violence against women, while women should have the right to say no to sex without fear of repercussion.

Only then can women be equal participants in private and public life, able to exercise their choice with intimate partners or a stranger at a club.

we can logo

About the author: Kokila Annamalai is the campaign coordinator for We Can! End All Violence Against Women (Singapore chapter), a global movement against gender violence.

This opinion piece was first published in TODAY on 26 June 2014.

Foster climate of respect for young people

By Jolene Tan, Programmes and Communications Senior Manager, AWARE

The recent conviction of Eisen Teo and ongoing discussion of the National University of Singapore’s termination of Tey Tsun Hang raise important issues about the appropriate conduct of professional and academic mentors toward young people under their care and influence.

studentsTeachers and other authority figures occupy positions of power which can be misused.  Even where the young people concerned are not technically minors, the power imbalance in the teaching or mentorship dynamic can enable exploitative and abusive behaviour.

Organisations which have contact with students and young people should institute robust policies about the standards expected of their staff.  This should include clear channels for complaints and documented procedures for handling them.

Our experience of advising organisations dealing with workplace sexual harassment suggests that policies must go beyond paper guidelines.  Regular training helps make all workers aware of the expectations they must meet, creating a zero tolerance environment for abusive behaviour.

This goes beyond simply avoiding direct sexual activity, to encouraging a climate of respect.

For instance, when co-workers joke about seeing students and young people connected with their organisation as targets for sexual activity, this may unwittingly legitimise and enable predatory colleagues.

Sex education in schools can also play a part, by helping students to understand and value the role of free and informed consent to sexual activity.  Minors should be taught that they are not always obliged to defer to authority figures, especially when it comes to setting and respecting personal boundaries.

In our regular interactions with young people, adults need to demonstrate that any concerns they raise – including about authority figures – will be taken seriously.

School counselors and anyone else caring for young people should respect their rights to privacy, confidentiality and the autonomy to make their own choices. This will make it easier for victims of sexual exploitation to report behaviour that makes them uncomfortable and to receive the support that they need.

We can also work to foster an atmosphere of openness and trust at home, where minors and young people can confide in parents and caregivers without fearing judgmental responses.

If children sense that any hint of sexual feelings or activity on their part will draw condemnation, suspicion or blame, they are less likely to share information which could alert parents and caregivers to situations of grooming, and enable them to provide assistance.

This letter was first published in the Straits Times Forum on 22 June 2014.

Parenting comes in many flavours

By Jolene Tan, Programmes and Communications Senior Manager, AWARE

man

Ms Shelen Ang is right to suggest that we should value childcare – and other caregiving – performed by men (“Fathers deserve more recognition”, 14 June).

The Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) has long called for greater support for active parenting by men, including by championing statutory paternity leave.

Men who wish to play a more active role in their children’s lives are often held back by archaic gender stereotypes which dictate male breadwinner and female caregiver roles.

It is therefore unfortunate that Ms Ang’s letter continues to promote rigid ideas about parenting, pigeonholing people according to gender and failing to reflect the rich diversity of our social reality.  She allocates to parents fixed roles, such as “providers of comfort” and “play exploration”, based simply on their gender, with no regard for their personal temperaments, preferences or strengths.

Every individual has different aptitudes and personality traits, regardless of gender, and will bring their own unique qualities to childcare and parenting.

As the parent of a toddler, I am familiar with the damaging anxiety that many new parents experience in the face of endless panic-mongering media and social messages about the “correct” way to raise children.  It is unhelpful and stifling to add to that further pressure through setting rigid, gendered standards for all, causing needless worry for parents who might wonder if they are parenting badly because they don’t conform to narrow prescriptions about whether they should “calm” or “startle” a baby based on their gender.

These stereotypes are also deeply exclusionary to the many parents who are trying their best to do right by their children and who simply happen not to follow some idealised template of “mother, father and children”, perhaps because they are unmarried, divorced, widowed or in same-sex relationships.  Assertions about the damage allegedly done by “father absence” also alienate children who might grow up without fathers for a variety of reasons.

Rather than continuing to promote prejudices about gender and parenting, we can do more to support fathers and all caregivers by recognising that childcare is valuable labour.  It requires recognition and support, whether it is done by mothers, fathers, grandparents, domestic workers or anyone else.  As with all work, each of us has to learn how to do it, and we will get better at it through experience and humility – acquiring skills and knowledge along the way, and bringing to the task our own individual flair and flavours.

An edited version of this letter was published in TODAY Voices on 20 June 2014.

Recognise all parties’ needs in divorce

By Vivienne Wee (Ms), Research and Advocacy Director, Association of Women for Action and Research

As the Committee for Family Justice reviews the family justice system in Singapore, the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) hopes that family law evolves to better recognise the vulnerabilities and needs of all parties in situations of divorce (“Women’s Charter ‘to be reviewed’ “; May 20).

For example, spouses undergoing divorce may find the procedures confusing or intimidating, and may face housing, financial and other difficulties for which they are not sufficiently prepared.

divorceWe welcome the committee’s proposal to introduce mandatory pre-writ consultation sessions for couples considering divorce to help them understand the issues that may arise. These consultations should be made available during and after the final judgment too, to ensure that parties have continued access to necessary support.

We also suggest that a “first information session” be offered to those who have been served a writ of divorce.

Aware has worked with many women who are confused by the divorce process and are ill-prepared to respond within the deadline of eight days set by the court.

Many find the process intimidating, especially if there are language barriers.

A “first information session” would help them respond in a more informed manner. This session should be conducted by a social worker or counsellor, who can also determine if there is abuse, violence or intimidation in the marriage or if either spouse needs financial, legal or psychological assistance.

Joint consultation and mediation sessions should not be required of victims of violence.

A helpline can be set up to provide information and assistance on divorce proceedings, including referrals to other resources such as legal clinics.

The Committee for Family Justice also recommended differentiated case management, providing different tracks for each type of case in court.

We recommend the extension of this principle. In cases of family violence, for example, the restriction on filing for divorce within the first three years of marriage should be removed and the divorce process expedited, in the best interests of the victim and children in the family.

Moreover, we suggest that no-fault divorce be made truly available. Though it exists in principle, in practice, spouses have to try to prove irretrievable breakdown as factual grounds for divorce, leading to unnecessary acrimony.

We have formally submitted these and further recommendations to the Committee for Family Justice for its consideration.

In the meantime, in response to the needs voiced by women undergoing divorce, Aware will be setting up a support group for women going through divorce.

This letter was first published in the Straits Times Forum on 12 July.

Recommendations for the Trafficking In Persons Bill

gavelAWARE and the Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (HOME) welcome the drafting of the Trafficking In Persons Bill. We are encouraged by the commitment and efforts of the Interagency Taskforce on Trafficking-in-Persons and Member of Parliament Christopher De Souza to combat trafficking in persons. We are also glad that the Taskforce has taken the feedback of the participants seriously.

However, we would like to address two key areas mentioned in the press release issued by the Taskforce and Mr De Souza on 25 May 2014, namely labour trafficking and victim support.

Labour Trafficking

Many participants at the public consultations called for stronger protection against labour trafficking and for the specification of indicators of what would constitute trafficking in persons, as distinct from employment law offences – a concern which has been mentioned in the press release by MP Chris de Souza and the Trafficking-in-Persons Task Force. During the consultations, the response given by the MP and the Task Force is that offences against migrant workers are “already addressed by existing employment laws.”

Together with HOME, Project X, Workfair, AWARE has reiterated our concern regarding this matter in a Joint Open Letter on the proposed Bill on 15 April, 2014. As we stated, many of us in civil society who have worked extensively on migrant worker issues frequently encounter cases of deceptive recruitment and severe maltreatment of workers which are not addressed by existing legislation – i.e. the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (EFMA). We assert that issues of trafficked and forced labour include the SGD 5,000 security bond, the lack of freedom to change employers, poor protection against long working hours, lack of wage protection, poor enforcement of the Passports Act and the ability of employers to repatriate workers, all of which need to be addressed. Unless these issues are considered, the proposed Bill will be not be protecting trafficked and deceptively recruited workers, as it is now contingent on an inadequate EFMA to cover gaps.

Victim Protection and Support Measures

The right to alternative employment and basic medical care should also be considered for provision within the Bill. As mentioned in the Joint Civil Society Statement, we believe that not including the right to work in legislation will leave the victim vulnerable to further victimisation through repatriation or deportation. According to the press release by the Taskforce and Mr De Souza, these are “being provided administratively where merited and can continue to remain so.” This procedure lacks transparency as it is not clear what is meant by “where merited”.

In response to our concerns about accurate victim identification and support, we appreciate that there will now be “administrative guidelines…to guide the assessing officer in determining what protection/ support measures to be accorded.” However, we would like to know what these guidelines are and whether they adequately address the needs of victims.

As cited in paragraph 12 of the press release, while some respondents had argued that the proposed protection and support measures above are fundamental entitlements and had to be legislated, others felt that not all these measures needed to become law as these should not be seen “as a right” before the status as a victim had yet to be determined. Addressing this point, we note from the press release that the Task Force promises “robust and effective ground efforts to…identify victims”, meaning that the status of a victim will be unambiguously identified as a priority. Consequently, there should be no issue about legislating all the protection and support measures in the proposed Bill as there will, presumably, be no prolonged interim period when the status of the victim has yet to be determined.

CPF must meet needs of the economically vulnerable

By Moana Jagasia, Research and Advocacy Coordinator, Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) and Vivienne Wee, Research and Advocacy Director, Aware

We refer to the article “Greater peace of mind when S’poreans retire” (May 17), which reported on the Government’s plans to improve Central Provident Fund (CPF) schemes to strengthen social safety nets for lower-income and vulnerable groups.

455-old-lady-yaan

We hope these changes will fundamentally improve the state’s assurance of financial security for these groups, which include women.

The increase of the mandatory minimum sum to $155,000 from $148,000 is worrying, since existing minimum sums are already not affordable for many Singaporeans. Figures reveal that in 2012, only 48.7 per cent of CPF members who turned 55 that year were able to meet the target then, of $139,000.

As CPF is tied to employment, those who do not or cannot work do not have CPF-based retirement funds. These include full-time homemakers, who are mostly women.

According to a 2012 Manpower Ministry report, 43 per cent of women who are economically inactive cited housework and caregiving as their main reasons for leaving the workforce. Consequently, women have less CPF savings than men, a trend identified by the CPF Board.

As women live longer than men, it is crucial that their financial needs are met after they survive breadwinners who might have been supporting them. Increasingly, elderly women become dependent on children who, in turn, become a “sandwich generation” that needs to support both parents and their own children.

As for health care, research from 2010 shows that 51 per cent of elderly patients have their hospital bills paid from their family members’ Medisave. More females (64 per cent) than males (38 per cent) do so.

Meeting the needs of economically vulnerable groups should be the prime objective of a retirement scheme.

A 2005 World Bank paper on pension systems recommended that the state provide minimal pension payments for low-income groups which are unable to finance their own retirement savings.

While public assistance is supposed to assist the marginalised, according to the Ministry of Social and Family Development, only 3,164 people were on ComCare Long-Term Assistance last year.

State rhetoric about wanting more community involvement from Singaporeans has to be made meaningful through adequate social assistance that meets the needs of all Singaporeans throughout their lives, not just when they are employed.

This letter was first published in the Straits Times Forum on 26 May.