Women's Views on News |
- The missing human rights issue: unpaid care
- Women in prison: a manifesto for change
- Report on care for girls: not good
| The missing human rights issue: unpaid care Posted: 09 Mar 2015 05:14 AM PDT
By Kate Donald. The distribution of care is not natural or inevitable, but rather socially constructed and in our power to change. "Women's rights are human rights", declared Hillary Clinton in Beijing nearly 20 years ago. This simple yet revolutionary statement has evolved into a mantra of the international human rights movement. However, one of the major obstacles to women enjoying their rights equally with men has been rarely recognised or even spoken of by human rights advocates. Something that happens every day, in every household, village and city around the world: the cooking, cleaning, and caring that families, communities and societies depend upon and simultaneously take for granted. All of us receive care at some point in our lives. Almost all of us will also give care, to children, to elderly parents, to partners. To speak of 'care' as a human rights issue risks dissonance. Isn't care a good thing? Don't we need more of it, not less? Indeed: it is not unpaid care per se that threatens human rights – being a foundational, unavoidable and very human activity that underpins all societies and cultures – but rather, the way it is distributed, and the lack of recognition and support it receives. Of course, from The Feminine Mystique to the Wages for Housework Campaign to The Second Shift, feminists have pilloried the discriminatory distribution of unpaid care. In general however, human rights and women's rights advocates have been slow to adopt it as a cause. Granted, in a field like women's rights there are a myriad of heart-rending issues fighting for attention; but surely something that so fundamentally shapes women's time, lives and opportunities should by all reasonable measures be a rallying point? One obstacle is that care has unfairly been perceived as an elite concern. Many of the public debates around care focus on the struggles of privileged professional women – the Sheryl Sandbergs of this world – to juggle motherhood and work. Poor women supposedly have more serious, life-or-death concerns. On the contrary: unpaid care work is intimately bound up with survival, with eking out an existence on subsistence crops and little income. It is the work of putting food on the table, insisting your children attend school so the next generation can have hopes of life away from the breadline, keeping everyone in the household clean and healthy so wages are not lost and unaffordable health costs are not incurred. In all countries, women provide the vast majority of unpaid care – and when unpaid care is taken into account, women work longer hours overall than men. It is also absolutely clear that the struggle is intensified for women living in poverty, because they can't afford to pay for outside help or time-saving technologies (be it a washing machine or grain-grinder), and because they are more likely to live in areas where public services are inadequate or absent. Rural women in many developing countries have the added burden of collecting water and fuel for domestic use – often walking hours each day to do so. In sub-Saharan Africa women and girls spend 40 billion hours each year collecting water – equivalent to a year's labour by the entire French workforce. The amount of time women spend on unpaid care is fundamental to defining their time, energy, finances and social and political capital. It is also definitively a human rights issue. Under international human rights law, including the International Covenants and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, if women are unable to enjoy a right to the same extent as men, this is automatically a human rights violation that requires remedy. States are explicitly required to take concrete measures to ensure that women are able to enjoy their rights equally, and to tackle any obstacles to them doing so. The gendered distribution of unpaid care work is unquestionably a major obstacle in this regard, preventing the equal enjoyment by women of a whole range of human rights. Most obviously, their rights to work and to equal rights at work are threatened. Even privileged women have to contend with the gender pay gap, lack of family leave rights, and maternity discrimination. For many poorer women with intensive care responsibilities, although they would dearly love the income, paid work is an impossibility. Others are forced to accept whatever badly paid flexible work they can find – often without labour rights or social security – and still perform the same 'second shift' when they get home, sacrificing their health and leisure. Girls' right to education is also put in jeopardy, whether they are withdrawn from school entirely or simply have less time and energy to devote to schoolwork or extra-curricular activities than boys due to their domestic duties. This has devastating knock-on consequences for their future opportunities and income. Compounding this, later in life women have less time for training or adult education opportunities because of their heavy domestic workload. Women are also less able to participate actively in politics and public life – another fundamental right – because of their unfair share of unpaid care. Practical considerations such as time and lack of childcare provision prevent many women from participating in public forums ranging from national parliaments to community groups. Hence, many decisions crucial to their lives and livelihoods are taken without them in the room. Undoubtedly, moving towards a fairer distribution of unpaid care will require profound socio-cultural change. However, governments have a crucial role to play in moving towards the more equal sharing of care, for example through education and awareness-raising campaigns, but also in a more immediate sense by more effectively supporting and providing care. Ensuring quality, accessible public services and care services, especially in poorer areas, can help to liberate women from unsustainably large burdens of care provision, as can improving infrastructure (piped water, decent roads) and subsidizing affordable time-saving technology such as fuel-efficient stoves. Unfortunately, there are striking examples of governments around the world doing exactly the opposite. As the Fawcett Society and the Women's Budget Group have shown, austerity measures in the UK are having a disproportionate impact on women; but the vandalism of austerity is not confined to Britain or even Europe. Recent research has shown that developing countries (many of them barely recovered from the similarly destructive effects of structural adjustment) are slashing public budgets with as much – or more – alacrity as their European counterparts. It goes without saying that their populations can even less afford to lose the services and benefits being cut. Wherever public services are cut, legislators and policy-makers are acting on the implicit assumption that women will take up the slack. In countries afflicted by the HIV/AIDS pandemic, 'home-based care' for people suffering from AIDS has been celebrated as a policy innovation. Really, it represents only an intensive scaling up of the norm – handing the burden back to poor women, away from overwhelmed and under-resourced health services. Women and girls provide 70-90 per cent of HIV/AIDS care, while the virus also affects women in greater numbers than men. The finances, equipment, drugs and training that these caregivers need to perform their work without jeopardizing their own health and livelihoods remain largely unrealized. 80 per cent of family caregivers in South Africa have reported reduced income levels. The evidence is clear that countries with greater gender equality in employment and education report higher rates of human development and economic growth. Thus, for reasons from principled to pragmatic, we should be devoting every possible effort to correcting the obscenely skewed distribution of unpaid care. Currently, 'women's empowerment' is one of the most oft-cited priorities in the halls of the UN and development agencies. However, without a real recognition of unpaid care as a fundamental factor limiting women's rights and life chances, empowerment is a mirage: akin to promising to end violence against women while ignoring domestic violence. Is a women empowered if she takes a low-paid job in a garment factory with no social security, only to start her second shift of domestic 'duties' as soon as she gets home, pausing only for a few hours' sleep? To truly empower woman would mean respecting care work as valuable and productive, giving it status, encouraging men to do it, and supporting it with resources and services. It would mean freeing women's time and potential, enabling them and supporting them to go out to work if they are able, ensuring they are given ample opportunity for training and advancement, and access to childcare. Hopefully, 2014 will be the year when unpaid care work is recognised as a core women's rights issue. There will be ample opportunities to make the connection between care, poverty, gender inequality and denial of women's rights – for example at the Commission on the Status of Women and in discussions around the global development agenda to succeed the Millennium Development Goals in 2015. Some organizations that work on poverty and development – most notably ActionAid, Oxfam, and the Institute for Development Studies – which is using animation as part of this work – are now taking this issue seriously. Hopefully human rights organizations will follow suit, including unpaid care work in their women's rights analyses and priorities, alongside issues such as violence against women, reproductive rights and employment. Hopefully, we will also start to see human rights jurisprudence further recognising the impacts of inadequate State support for unpaid care, and making recommendations for its redistribution. Care is non-negotiable and fundamental. It has to be done. It can be a huge source of fulfillment and joy; but we also have to acknowledge that it can also entail heavy costs, especially for women living in poverty. The way it is currently distributed between women and men is unjust and unsustainable. In all countries, unsupported and unshared care work perpetuates women's poverty, political marginalization and social subordination. We cannot hope to achieve gender equality without fully facing up to this injustice. The distribution of care is not natural or inevitable, but rather socially constructed and in our power to change. Kate Donald is a human rights researcher, formerly at the International Council on Human Rights Policy. She has worked with the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights on a report to the UN General Assembly on unpaid care and human rights; and has conducted research on the penalisation of poverty and examined the interface between human rights and public policy, including sexuality, corruption and business. A version of this post appeared in OpenDemocracy in 2014 but bears re-posting today. |
| Women in prison: a manifesto for change Posted: 09 Mar 2015 05:08 AM PDT
The majority are serving short sentences for non-violent offences. More often than not, they have been victims of crime prior to becoming perpetrators. Over 50 per cent of women in prison report having suffered domestic violence; 1 in 3 has experienced sexual abuse. The UK has one of the highest rates of women's imprisonment in Western Europe. The majority serve short sentences for non-violent offences. Many women are trapped in an endless cycle within the Criminal Justice System – 45 per cent are reconvicted within a year of release. And – or but – short sentences wreck lives. A few weeks ‘inside’ can mean that a woman loses her children, her home, and her job. Every year, about 20,000 children are deprived of their mothers. It is time for a new approach to criminal justice. It is time for a fair, effective and cost-efficient Criminal Justice System, where the abuse, marginalisation and poverty at the root of so much of women’s offending is addressed. The Women in Prison's manifesto calls for: Greater use of alternatives to custodial sentencing; Cross-departmental Ministerial leadership; Support for the women-specialist voluntary sector; Action to ensure no woman leaves prison homeless; and Commitment and acceleration of gender-specific reforms to the women's prison estate. Women in Prison is a national organisation supporting women affected by the Criminal Justice System and since 1984, have campaigned for social justice rather than criminal justice. Women in Prison was born out of the anger founder Chris Tchaikovsky felt about what she saw when incarcerated in HMP Holloway. Women in Prison believes that prison as it exists today is no place for women. it therefore supports women to avoid, survive and exit the Criminal Justice System and campaign for the radical changes required to deliver justice for women. Its manifesto proposes: Alternatives to custodial sentencing: The government should introduce a statutory presumption against the use of short custodial sentences. Custody is the most serious sanction available to courts and the primary option to a court should be a community sentence. Reoffending rates are high for women serving short sentences. This should not come as a surprise. A custodial sentence cuts women off from their children, families, support networks and community services. When released, the circumstances that led to prison in the first place will not have changed. Community sentencing works and offers value for money. It is not a soft option; it requires an intensive, tailor-made programme of daily activities that is monitored and provides a holistic rehabilitation plan Women in Prison is calling on all supporters and General Election candidates to pledge a commitment to our manifesto and show their support for women. Leadership: The Government must appoint a Ministerial lead for women in the Criminal Justice System with a cross-departmental remit, working to a clearly defined target for the reduction of women in prison. The position should work in conjunction with a newly-formed Women's Justice Board. Implementing policies to change the lives of marginalised women requires strong leadership operating across the multitude of social and economic factors that lead women down the path to crime. The Youth Justice Board has significantly contributed to halving the prison population for young people. The same approach should be adopted to reduce the women's prison population. Women-specialist sector: The UK boasts an unparalleled level of expertise and care for marginalised women, the quality of which is driven by the third sector. As we move into the Transforming Rehabilitation agenda, the provision of gender-specific, high quality support services and expertise must be sustained, supported with ring-fenced funding provided. Whether serving a community sentence or on licence, access to effective support services is vital for rehabilitation. Research and experience show that women respond better to gender-specific solutions that offer a holistic approach, and thus improve self-esteem, well-being and their ability to take control of their lives. No woman should leave prison homeless: Housing is essential to rehabilitation; no woman should leave prison homeless. There must be a statutory duty to place women released from prison as 'priority need' of housing. Nearly 40 per cent of women are leaving prison homeless. Homelessness is an immediate barrier to getting one's life back on track or laying the foundations for some stability. A policy ensuring that women have suitable accommodation upon leaving prison may seem costly, but is, in fact, a long-term saving for the UK taxpayer, since it drastically reduces the risk of reoffending and its ensuing cost. Prison estate reform: A significant amount of public money has already been invested in reforming the women's prison estate. The new Government needs to build on this investment, ensure the recommendations are implemented and accelerate the pace of radical reform in line with a gender-specific approach. Women in Prison welcomes the government's commitment to deliver the recommendations made by the Women's Custodial Estate Review. The review embeds a gender specific reform of the estate which is vital to reduce re-offending and enable the effective resettlement of women in their communities. Please join the campaign and support women affected by the Criminal Justice System. |
| Report on care for girls: not good Posted: 09 Mar 2015 03:54 AM PDT
The Girls in the Criminal Justice System report assessing the effectiveness of youth offending services, secure establishments and other organisations working to reduce the vulnerability of girls and their likelihood of offending was published recently. The report is the result of a joint inspection made by HM Inspectorate of Probation; the Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales; the Care Quality Commission; HM Inspectorate of Constabulary; HM Inspectorate of Prisons and the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted). An inspection which highlighted the varying ways girls are dealt with in the criminal justice system. The aim of the inspection was to assess how effectively youth offending services and secure establishments, in conjunction with other organisations, are in helping to stop girls offending and in reducing the risk of harm girls present to other people and whether these services were helping to make girls less vulnerable. Alcohol played less of a factor than expected, although some girls drank to excess as a way of coping with the difficult situations in which they found themselves. But there was a complex interplay between offending and sexual exploitation. Some girls were more vulnerable to exploitation because of their offending; their offending behaviour put them into situations where they were more likely to be sexually exploited. Others were being sexually exploited, which often acted as a trigger for offending behaviour. The inspection team found some very good targeted and sensitive work, which enabled girls to recognise the factors that led to their offending, that managed the risk they posed to others appropriately, and that identified when girls were not safe and responded appropriately. There were, however, some serious deficiencies. Too often, there was a poor assessment of the links between girls' specific vulnerabilities and their offending behaviour. In particular, in some areas, there was insufficient consideration of the high risks associated with child sexual exploitation. Multi-agency work was often poorly coordinated. Because of these variations in the delivery of services, it was difficult to avoid reaching the conclusion that if you are a girl who comes into contact with the criminal justice system, the quality of support and assistance you receive varies both within and between Youth Offending Teams (YOTs). The inspection found that child sexual exploitation is a significant factor in girl’s offending; alcohol use was found to be a coping mechanism; and drug use was found to be a result of offending rather than a cause of their vulnerability, like homelessness could be. Girls who were looked after by local authorities were also extremely vulnerable. As a response, work was put in by most Youth Offending Team workers and staff for females, who were found to be more complex than males within custodial establishments and needed gender-sensitive approaches. Data available from Young Offender Institutions were found to be limited so limited conclusions could be made about the effectiveness of services; however, girls did receive better outcomes when their needs had been accurately assessed and they received the right, gender-sensitive support adapted to their needs. The report made a number of recommendations. The Chairs of the Youth Offending Team Management Boards should ensure that: Work is undertaken to understand and identify needs which are specific to girls and that appropriate services are commissioned to meet those needs; The effectiveness of interventions for girls is evaluated in order to support the development and continuous improvement of practice; They regularly review data by gender to understand the trends of offending by girls, and then use that data to develop the shape and content of future provision; There is effective liaison and cooperation between Youth Offending Teams and other agencies working to safeguard girls at risk of sexual exploitation and that the effectiveness of this cooperation is regularly monitored and evaluated: including any out of area placements for girls; and Staff working with girls are suitably skilled and trained to assess and meet the specific needs of girls effectively. It also said that Youth Offending Team managers should ensure that: Assessments of likelihood of reoffending and risk of harm take into account the impact of gender; Appropriate interventions are offered to meet the needs of girls; Assessments of vulnerability take the impact of gender into account and for all girls consider the possibility of child sexual exploitation; Health practitioners are sufficiently involved with the work carried out, in particular, in relation to assessment, interventions and information sharing: and Exit strategies are developed to ensure that girls have access to appropriate ongoing support when their involvement with Youth Offending Teams ends. Local authorities, the report continues, should ensure that senior corporate parents including Directors of Children's Services and elected members, routinely review the offending rates of Looked After Children by gender to ensure that they understand patterns of offending by girls and are able to take action to address this where necessary. They should also ensure that where girls are known to children's social care, regular contact should be maintained while they are in custody so that plans for their release are made in a timely way and involve them fully, in line their legal duties. And police forces should ensure that early intervention schemes, commissioned, provided or used by the police, take account of the needs and interests of girls. To read the full report, click here. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Women's Views on News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |