Culture Ethics And Researchers Responsibilities: A Case Study

Background

Discuss about the Culture Ethics and Researchers Responsibilities.

The case deals with the charges of child and sexual abuse by the father under the legislation of Family Court Act 1997 section 70A (1). However, the accused father denied the charges against him and pleaded to have the child’s custody due to the lack of unsubstantiated disclosures found by the “child protection authority”. On the contrary, the allegations put by the child’s mother were based on the statements made by the child as well as based on the lookouts for abuse signs. Considering the circumstances and contentions made by the mother, ethical codes has been identified in the study together with the social and cultural factors. The study also represents the analysis of ethical values with respect to the child protection activities and duties of parents for the benefits of child during the growing stage. The study highlights the cultural diversification, social practices and values for raising children by single parent related to their “protective behaviours”.

The present case involves a case of sexual abuse of child by the father that was witnessed by the child’s mother in January 2014. The child in the present case was six years old was found to have been abused by the father, which included rubbing of the child’s private body parts while punishing him. Further, during the month of April 2014, the child informed the mother about the abusing actions taken by the father that has been noticed by the mother during the time of supervision. Accordingly, the mother contended to the court about the abusive behaviour of the father towards his child. However, the court in first application ordered the supervision action along with the appointment of psychologist to keep a check and teach the child regularly. The court further ordered the parent of the child to provide him with regular therapy with respect to the protective behaviour for the child’s safety and healthy growth.

Moreover, during the period September 2014, the child disclosed to the mother about the actions while the mother successfully convinced the court for the requirement of court’s supervision. As a consequence, the court advised the father to meet the child under the supervision of female relatives and for short period of time in order to protect the child behaviour. It was further noted that the trial was scheduled to start in Bunbury in the month of February 2015, which failed to be commenced until June 2015 and further failed to be completed due to absence of the mother after a receipt of writ order from the court.

Cultural

It was further noted that father sought the orders for the proceedings in the year 2012 stating the order with respect to equal sharing of parental responsibility for the child. Since, the concerned allegations were denied by the father due to lack of evidence therefore, during the course of first trial, the father changed his proposal of equal share. Moreover, in the second trial, the father amended the application of proposal for the full time child responsibility, which was applied in presence of the mother’s allegations. On the contrary, the child’s mother contended that there should be equal sharing responsibility subject to the father’s presence during day- time.

In case of legislations under the Family Court Act, there are social factors that recognise the grounds for considering theories and explanations for the protection and safeguard of family members. It has been suggested that the social theories incorporates the explanation that enhances the seriousness of the offence that is related to the parenting responsibilities for the child (Featherstone et al., 2014). Considering the case of child abuse legislations of Adoption Act 1993 is to be applied together with the legislations of Human Rights Act 2004 to protect and safeguard the child behaviour for the best interest. The present case involves a situation of child abuse by the father during the course of punishment, which was witnessed by the mother and contended the supervision order to check on the father’s actions and to protect the child (Leviner, 2014). As a social factor, it is essential in the present case that the child’s parents provide their respective responsibilities with the uniformity to create care and support. It has been considered that the given case incorporates abusive actions of father to his child indicating the social offence touching of private parts of the child is considered as a social offence (Berrick et al., 2015).

According to the social requirements, it is essential for the parents to conduct their parenting duties with responsibilities in the best interests of their children. As per the rulings in case of Berry Street Inc, Submission FV 163, it has been noted that the accused part held for sexual abuse to the child in the organization, which had been a criminal offence (Leigh, 2016). Accordingly, in the present case of Briggs and Kerr it has been observed that parents of the child contended changes in proposals for sharing responsibility to attend the child. It was further contended by the father that he wanted to attend the child for full – time period whereas the mother contended that he should be allowed only for weekends during day- time. Therefore, it can be said that the case represents offences for child protection and due care that would eventually affect the social values and morals with respect to the child behaviour (Murray, Nguyen & Cohen, 2014).

Code of ethics

Considering the cultural factors, it has been identified that the regional differences and cultural diversification affects the child protection behaviour that leads to a chid abusive actions. Several children belong to different countries having diversified cultures that not only strikes the sexual abusing practices but also malpractices and cultural beliefs (Pipe et al., 2013). In the given case, it has been mentioned that the child had been suffered from the sexual abuse by his father that is against the cultural factor enhances the standard of living of the society as well as creates social values. Considering the legislations on abusing children, Children and Community Services Act 2004 includes protection of child on the statutory level within home care protection as well as out- of home care services (Dettmeyer, Verhoff & Schütz, 2014). The present case incorporates general provisions with respect to child maintenance as per the cultural identity as well as the community as the accused involved has been the child’s father. Child protection activity incorporates the child support after care that has been contained in the Australian jurisdictions, which is valid to children up to the age of 21 years (Pruett & DiFonzo, 2014).

The legislations under National Framework for protection of Australian children incorporate the jurisdiction of state governments for protection of children. In addition, cultural factor in the present case indicates that the responsibility of the parents should be checked and supervised by the government officials or court referees. In general sense, parents are held as the most responsible individuals for child care and protection, therefore if the they are held for abusing their own children it hampers the cultural values in the community (Kagitcibasi, 2013). For instance, diverse child practices incorporate affection display towards the children including education, safeguard and respect for others that may include professional interpretation. It has been noted that certain parents provide undue pressure on their children related to the critical activities, study pressure along with the physical punishments. Such activities by the parents indicate high risk on the ethical values of the society and cultural morals within the community (Dean & Taylor-Gooby, 2014).

In any governing legislations, maintenance of code of ethics is essential to protect the rights and values of the children to assist them with the acceptable behaviours, maintenance of standards as well as ethical dilemmas. Code of ethics refers to a process with written set of principles and standards that directs the organisations and governing authorities to protect the rights of the individuals as well as to maintain the benchmark for the benefits of the society (McWayne et al., 2013). In addition, it is essential to follow the principles and procedures of ethical codes to protect the values of weak and vulnerable children including the assistance to make decisions during the period of ethical dilemmas. Situation that incorporates moral conflicts between the parties or individuals affecting the responsibilities and duties is called as ethical dilemmas (Marcdante & Kliegman, 2014). Accordingly, in case of child sexual abuse, which was contended by parents, is considered as ethical dilemmas against the protection and safeguard of the child. The legislations of Family Court Act, Adoption Act and Family Law Act ensure the compliance of ethical principles for the parents and individuals while raising or attending their children (Fisher & Mustanski, 2014).

In the present case, father of the child held for sexually abused his child while giving him punishment depicts the lack of ethical codes while performing the parental responsibilities and protection behaviour (Grinbaum & Groves, 2013). It can be said that the case lacks the ethics on maintaining the practical standards since, giving punishment to the child is not an offence but touching the private parts represents lower practical standards. In addition, the act of father to his child reflected parental behaviours, which is not acceptable by the governing authorities within the society. The case reflected harmful actions for the powerless child impose by his father, which indicated the ethical dilemmas that could affect the beliefs in family relations (Cater & Øverlien, 2014). It has been further noticed that the course of action by the father towards his child represented negative consequences with respect to the privacy rights and unauthorised activities. The situation in the present case involved inappropriate actions of the child’s parents as the mother contended order for father’s visit during the day- time along with the company of female relatives. Similar to the case in the legislation of Children and Community Services Act, the accused party for non- compliance of ethical policies was imposed with fine for a maximum amount $36,000 and imprisonment for a year (Cater & Øverlien, 2014). Accordingly, it can be said that the present situation would reflect imposition of penalty or fine on the accused father of the child.

According to Rigby et al., 2015, parenting responsibilities involves maintain the rights and duties of the parents to protect the interests and values of the child required for their growth and upbringing. Legislations of the Family Court Act 1997 (WA), states that parents are responsible to protect the rights and benefits of the children with respect to the social values, cultural values and ethical values. In the present case, the father had been accused of punishing the child together by abusing him sexually (Rigby et al., 2015). As per the legislations on child’s protection, it is essential for a parent to protect the rights of children therefore, the governing authorities considers regular supervisions and checks on the parental behaviour towards their child.

Considering the given case, it can be said that the legislations in the Family Court Act, it is essential to provide the children that includes financial support, clothing, education support, protection and healthcare. In case parents fail to provide the relevant necessities or fail to comply the responsibilities or fail to protect the children then it will be considered as a child offence (Bijleveld, Dedding & Bunders?Aelen, 2015). In the present case, child’s mother contended the charges against the father alleging the abusive actions and appealed for permission to take the child along in Perth. However, the court allowed to supervise the father’s activity which represents the consideration of ethical values, integrity and parental morals (Rodriguez, 2013).

As per the regulations of child protection act, it is essential to maintain the parental responsibilities and duty of protection to the children. Accordingly, it is important to consider the substantial evidences in confirming the allegations on the parent for abusing the child sexually or emotionally. Grendell et al., (2016) stated that the legislations on child welfare ensures that the child’s integrity and privacy has been maintained and protected for the benefit of society and community. The social work involves respect, value as well as inherent dignity that constitute ethical principles to perform the professional work. It is essential to critically examine the core values of the responsibility parents’ behaviour for the protection of child. Accordingly, application of critical theory, legal and social regulations have to be considered. As per the given situation, it has been observed that the child and the mother influenced the actions of the father by disclosing the facts. Applying the approach of critical theory it has been considered that the actions of the father could be presented together with the evidences. Such action would have presented the case with more strong and logical point. Instead of allowing the supervision approach on the child’s father, the court should have allowed to consider the child’s statement along with the valid evidences.

On the contrary, it can be said that the actions of sexual abuse on a child is difficult to prove but at the same time, it involves moral issues and cultural issues that affects the social standards. Accordingly, it can be suggested that the mother while witnessing the incident and actions of father resulted in child’s abuse; she should have been recorded and later presented to the court. Further, while making application on equal sharing responsibility for child’s upbringing and growth, it can be said that the father should not have been allowed to take the responsibility alone rather; the mother also should be accompanied with the official representatives. Further, it can be said that the core values of the parental behaviour should be examined and provide consultancy to the father for the purpose of explaining the ethical principles on child protection and best interest.

Conclusion

In view of the above discussion, it can be said that the present case with respect to the legislations of Family Court Act, it is essential to perform the parental behaviour by following the ethical principles. In the case, the main parties involved were the child’s mother and father in which the father was charged against the sexual abuse on the child. It was considered that the case involved social issues, cultural issues and ethical issues that affect the child’s integrity and values. The actions of the father in the present situation implied the diminishing value in social standards together with the integrity of the child’s values. In addition, the case involved cultural issues in terms of difference in culture in different regions as well as the ethical values affecting the rights of the powerless child. Accordingly, the stakeholders in the case are required to provide relevant nourishments to the child and to safeguard the interest of the child’s benefits with respect to the basic- necessities. Application of critical theory approach can be considered to implement the actions on disclosing father’s actions on the child so that the court could take corrective measures for the protection of the child. 

Reference List

Berrick, J. D., Peckover, S., Pösö, T., & Skivenes, M. (2015). The formalized framework for decision-making in child protection care orders: A cross-country analysis. Journal of European Social Policy, 25(4), 366-378.

Bijleveld, G. G., Dedding, C. W., & Bunders?Aelen, J. F. (2015). Children’s and young people’s participation within child welfare and child protection services: a state?of?the?art review. Child & Family Social Work, 20(2), 129-138.

Cater, Å., & Øverlien, C. (2014). Children exposed to domestic violence: a discussion about research ethics and researchers’ responsibilities. Nordic Social Work Research, 4(1), 67-79.

Dean, H., & Taylor-Gooby, P. (2014). Dependency culture. Routledge.

Dettmeyer, R. B., Verhoff, M. A., & Schütz, H. F. (2014). Child sexual abuse. In Forensic Medicine (pp. 309-319). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Featherstone, B., Morris, K., White, S., & White, S. (2014). Re-imagining child protection: Towards humane social work with families. Policy Press.

Fisher, C. B., & Mustanski, B. (2014). Reducing health disparities and enhancing the responsible conduct of research involving LGBT youth. Hastings Center Report, 44(s4), S28-S31.

Grendell, T. J., Siu, T. L., Hurst, A. J., & Pavlovcak, T. (2016). Protecting Ohio’s Children: Ohio Juvenile Court Jurisdiction to Prevent Nonparty Interference in the Protection of the Best Interest of a Child. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 67(2), 67-74.

Grinbaum, A., & Groves, C. (2013). What is “responsible” about responsible innovation? Understanding the ethical issues. Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society, 119-142.

Kagitcibasi, C. (2013). Family, self, and human development across cultures: Theory and applications. Routledge.

Leigh, J. (2016). The story of the PPO queen: the development and acceptance of a spoiled identity in child protection social work. Child & Family Social Work, 21(4), 412-420.

Leviner, P. (2014). Child protection under Swedish law—legal duality and uncertainty. European Journal of Social Work, 17(2), 206-220.

Marcdante, K., & Kliegman, R. M. (2014). Nelson essentials of pediatrics. Elsevier Health Sciences.

McWayne, C. M., Melzi, G., Schick, A. R., Kennedy, J. L., & Mundt, K. (2013). Defining family engagement among Latino Head Start parents: A mixed-methods measurement development study. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28(3), 593-607.

Murray, L. K., Nguyen, A., & Cohen, J. A. (2014). Child sexual abuse. Child and adolescent psychiatric clinics of North America, 23(2), 321-337.

Pipe, M. E., Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., & Cederborg, A. C. (Eds.). (2013). Child sexual abuse: Disclosure, delay, and denial. Psychology Press.

Pruett, M. K., & DiFonzo, J. H. (2014). Closing the gap: Research, policy, practice, and shared parenting. Family Court Review, 52(2), 152-174.

Rigby, P., Thomson, K., Macsween, C., & Tudor, C. (2015). The Identification and Support of Child Victims of Trafficking in Scotland: A Child Protection Model.

Rodriguez, C. M. (2013). Analog of parental empathy: Association with physical child abuse risk and punishment intentions. Child abuse & neglect, 37(8), 493-499.