Reformasi Birokrasi Pemerintahan mulai diembus pada tahun 2008 dalam sebuah kebijakan Menteri PAN yang dituangkan pada Peraturan Menteri Negara PAN Nomor :PER/15/M.PAN/7/2008 tentang Pedoman Umum Reformasi Birokrasi. Karena kebijakan ini hanya sebuah pedoman umum, maka setiap instansi pemerintah baik yang berada di pusat maupun di daerah atau dipelosok desa dipersilahkan untuk memahami, menterjemahkan, dan menerapkan sendiri secara bebas dengan kekuatan sumber daya yang sangat terbatas. Kementerian PAN sangat memaklumi hal ini, maka kebijakan tersebut tidak perlu disosialisasikan kepada jajaran aparatur negara yang tersebar dalam otonomi daerah masing-masing. Atau Kementerian PAN sendiri masih bingung dengan rumusan kebijakan yang dibuat sendiri. Bisa jadi bingung karena tidak paham betul dengan rumusan dari reformasi birokrasi karena rumusan ini mungkin dibuat oleh konsultan. Suatu kemungkinan. Kalau dugaan ini salah, maka harus dianggap salah, tetapi kalau dianggap benar, maka anggap saja benar. Atau Kementerian PAN belum melaksanakan reformasi birokrasi secara benar seperti diamanatkan dalam maksud dan tujuan dari kebijakan Pedoman Umum eformasi Birokrasi.
Indah sekali rumusan maksud dan tujuan dari reformasi birokrasi, yaitu merubah maindset, sikap dan perilaku, serta nilai-nlai kerja dari aparatur pemerintah dan birokrasi yang sudah membusuk dan terkontaminasi "limbah beracun" yang bernama korupsi. Penyakit korupsi ini sudah masuk dalam stadium empat harus disembuhkan dengan kebijakan dari Menpan ini. Dengan demikian hasil yang akan dicapai akan lebih baik, seperti yang diharapkan dalam pedoman umum reformasi birokrasi, yaitu birokrasi yang bersih, birokrasi yang efisien, efektif dan produktif, birokrasi yang transparan, birokrasi yang melayani masyarakat, birokrasi yang akuntabel sehingga terwujud suatu postur aparatur negara yang integritas tinggi, aparatur yang produktifitas tinggi dan bertanggung jawab, dan aparatur negara yang mempunyai kemampuan memberikan pelayanan prima.
Memang masih banyak kalangan masyarakat yang sangat meragukan upaya suci ini dapat terwujud. tentu saja keraguan ini muncul dari kalangan pengamat birokrasi. Pengamat yang tidak menggunakan pemikiran yang kontroversial, berarti bukan seorang pengamat.
Keraguan merubah mindset, skap dan perilaku, serta nilai-nilai kerja birokrasi yang sudah membusuk pada tubuh aparatur negara untuk menjadi lebih baik dan bebas dari korupsi juga datang dari elite politikus. Wajar saja politikus bersikap seperti itu karena politikus itu harus bersikap kritis dan harus melakukan kontrol terhadap jalannya roda pemerintahan yang notabene dijalankan oleh aparatur pemerintah. Atau memang kehendak dari para politikus bahwa birokrasi pemerintah harus busuk agar demikian orang-orang partai dapat masuk ke dalam birokrasi pemerintahan untuk memimpin dan mendulang 'emas' bagi kepentingan pribadi dan partainya. Birokrasi tetap busuk akan lebih baik.!!
Tetapi bagaimana pandangan dari birokrat pemerintahan sendiri ? Ada beberapa pandangan terhadap reformasi birokrasi, yaitu adanya pandangan yang pro terhdap reformasi birokrasi; ada pandangan yang menolak reformasi, serta ada pandangan yang 'abu-abu'. Pandangan yang 'pro' dilandasi adanya pandangan bahwa birokrasi pemerintah pada semua instansi pemerintah sudah rusak dn busuk sehingga perlu perubahan total dan bila perlu perubahan radikal pada mindset, sikap dan perilaku, serta nilai-nilai kerja. Pandangan ini ada pada kelompok birokrat muda yang belum terkontaminasi dan terjerumus dlam kebusukan penyakit korupsi. Pola pikir birokrat muda ini masih murni dengan idealisme untuk mengabdi bagi kepentingan pemerintah dan rakyat yang sangat mengharapkan pelayanan prima. Hanya saja kelompok ini dipandang sebagai kelompok radikal yang tidak bisa bekerjasama dengan pimpinan karena dianggap sangat membahayakan kedudukan dan kepentingannya untuk meningkatkan kesejahteraan secara ilegal. Kelompok birokrat muda ini dipandang sebagai kelompok reforasi murni karena kelompok yang 'pro' ditemukan juga kelompok yang pro tidak murni. Kelompok pro yang tidak murni hanya setuju kepada program reformasi birokrasi, tetapi tidak mau merubah mindset, sikap dan perilaku, serta nilai-nilai kerja yang sudah busuk. Kelompok ini mempunyai mindset, sikap dan perilaku yang seolah-olah sudah berubah. Kelompok pro yang tidak murni berada pada posisi yang sudah mapan dimana korupsi dan penyalahgunaan wewenang adalah gaya kepemimpinannya. Sayangkan bila jabatan dan wewenanganya tidak dimanfaatkan untuk memperkaya diri. Apakah kelompok ini tidak takut dengan KPK? Tentu saja mereka tidak takut karena KPK hanya organisasi baru dan pemimpinnya tidak paham dan kurang pengalaman dalam melakukan korupsi. Sedangkan kelompok pro yang tidak murni ini lebih berpengalaman dan mempunyai strategi yang komprehensif untuk melakukan korupsi dan melakukan pengamanan dirinya. Harus ada contoh dong, mungkin bisa dilihat pada instansi Kepolisian dalam pengurusan sim dimana banyak calo sim bergentayangan di lingkungan polda daan mogot yang jelas mempunyai jaringan dengan orang dalam untuk mempelancar keluarnya sim dengan harus membayar minimal tiga ratus ribu rupiah tetapi prosedur pembuatan sim tetap dijalankan secara legal. Cantik bukan permainannya, lebih cantik lagi bila masyarakat tidak menggunakan calo tetapi sulit lulus tes tertulis dan praktek. Hem..cantik..cantik.
Nah, kelompok yang tidak setuju reformasi birokrasi menganggap bahwa reformasi birokrasi ini merupakan kendala untuk mencapai impian yang lebih baik mendapat kedudukan yang lebih tinggi yang otamatis kesempatan untuk 'maling' terbuka lebar. Kelompok ini ada yang tegas menolak reformasi tetapi takut mendeklarasikan diri. Tetapi ada kelompok yang menolak reformasi tidak secara terang-terangan karena kedudukan yang 'basah' dan 'empuk' tetapi bibirnya mengucapkan reformasi birokrasi secara sistimatis. Kelompok ini bisa disebut juga sebagai kelompok 'kadal' yang biasanya berada pada posisi mapan.
Sedangkan kelompok 'abu-abu' adalah kelompok birokrat yang tidak perduli dengan kebijakan reformasi karena tidak ada keuntunganya bagi dirinya. disamping mereka berpikir bahwa kebijakan ini hanya sebuah kamuflase saja dan sebuah sandiwara yang dimainkan secara menarik oleh birokrat. Bisa juga kelompok ini adalah kelompok sakit hati karena keinginan untuk mendpatkan jabatan lebih tinggi tidak dapat diraih karena tidak mau ikut bermain dalan aturan permainan seperti DUK (Daftar Urutan Keuangan).
Pelantikan kabinet baru oleh Presiden SBY pada tanggal 22 Okober 2009, menetapkan Kementerian yang mengurus reformasi birokrasi pemerintahan yang diberikan sepenuhnya kepada Menteri PAN. Dari aspek kedudukan Menpan berada dalam posisi yang sama dengan menteri-menteri lain yang memimpin departemen. Sedangkan pembinaan kepegawaian dan birokrasi pada setiap departemen merupakan tanggunjawab masing-masing menteri. Menpan jangan turut campur urusan dapur dari setiap departemen. Jadi sulit untuk lebih efektif bekerjanya Kementerian PAN dan Reformasi Birokrasi Pemerintahan. Presiden harus memberikan wewenang dan kekuasaan yang lebih besar dengan sebuah keputuasan politik diperkuat sebuah keputusan presiden agar menteri tidak merasa malu dan dilangkahi. Hem..mungkin bisa dilakukan. Semoga Reformasi Birokrasi Pemerintahan terwujud dalam capaian waktu lima tahun kedepan. Amin.
Wednesday 21 October 2009
Sunday 27 September 2009
NURDIN M TOP DALAM PERSPEKTIF PARODI
28 September 2009
Sembilan tahun melakukan aksi-aksi pengeboman di berbagai tempat di negeri yang multi kultural, multi etnis, multi bahasa, dan kaya akan sumber alam. Negeri itu adlah Indonesia. Indonesia yang kaya dan multi aspek tersebut justru dijadikan arena bagi aksi biadab dari si individu yang bernama Nurdin M Top. Akhirnya, Nurdin M Top ini mati ditembak oleh pasukan Dansus 88. Berakhirlah nyawa Nurdin ini dan berakhir pula episode aksi Nurdin M Top, maka jadilah Nurdin yang tidak Top lagi. Tertembaknya Nurdin yang tidak Top ini pada hari tanggal yang tidak perlu dingat, karena adanya kecemburuan dari sebagian warga terutama para korban dari aksi pengeboman dimana keluarga mati karena di bom justru tidak dingat hari maupun tanggalnya, misalnya kapan dan pada hari apa korban yang kritis meninggal di rumah sakit . Tidak tahu bukan, lalu kenapa harus dingat hari dan tanggal kematian si Nurdin yang tidak Top lagi ini.
Nurdin “tidak” Top dengan gagahnya berlalang buana selama sembilan tahun, dari satu pulau pindah ke pulau lain, dari satu kota pindah ke kota lain dengan gampangnya dan tanpa diketahui oleh warga setempat. Ketika tinggal di negeri kelahirnya saja, si Nurdin “tidak” Top ini merasakan tidak nyaman, selalu dikejar-kejar dan akan ditangkap oleh pemerintah Malaysia. Dari hasil observasi dan informasi bahwa Negara Indonesia adalah tempat yang sangat aman dan nyaman untuk tinggal dan hidup bagi para teroris, maka Nurdin “tidak” Top berangkat ke Indonesia, dan meninggalkan Malaysia, tanpa adanya kecurigaan dari pihak pemerintah Indonesia terutama pihak imigrasi airport kalau dia berangkat dengan pesawat udara, atau tidak perduli pihak beacukai dan pihak polisi pelabuhan laut kalau si Nurdin ini melalu jalan laut. Sudah merupakan rahasia warga asing bahwa masuk ke Indonesia sangat mudah hanya dengan memberikan uang tip yang berlebihan maka lolos untuk tinggal dan hidup di negeri ini. Memang saat itu birokrasi pemerintahan sangat bobrok sejak ditinggalkan oleh almarhum Bapak Soeharto yang diganti dengan pemerintahan reformasi. Mungkin masih dalam suasana eforia reformasi, kewaspadaan berkurang.
Nurdin “tidak” Top hidup dengan tanpa adanya gangguan dan kejaran dari pemerintah Indonesia maka dengan rasa aman merencanakan aksi pengeboman secara terencana dengan baik dan terbukti dalam pelaksaannya pengeboman berjalan dengan mulus tanpa tertangkap oleh pihak berwajib. Kembali hidup di desa dan menikah dengan anak gadis desa yang lugu dan bodoh. Kepala desa dan aparat desa serta masyarakat sekitarnya tidak mau perduli dengan warga baru yang tinggal dan hidup di sekitarnya. Budaya sungkan yang dimiliki dari warga desa untuk mencari tahu lebih banyak informasi tentang warga barunya. Atau karena kebodohan yang dikarenakan rendahnya tingkat pendidikan warga masyarakat sehingga warga masyarakat tidak mampu bersikap kritis. Tentu saja karena hal ini lebih disebabkan kaena otak Nurdin ini sangat cerdas bisa mencari tempat yang warganya mayoritas bodoh dari tingkat pendidikan maupun rendahnya pengetahuan agamanya sehingga dengan mudah mempengaruhi warga desa dengan dalil-dalil agama yang mahir dimiliki oleh si Nurdin yang tidak Top lagi ini. Gadis desa sangat mudah dirayu dengan kemampuan bercinta yang luar biasa ditambah dengan tampan wajahnya yang membuat gadis desa tergoda untuk mau menjadi isteri. Orang tua si gadis dapat mudah ditundukan dengan memperlihatkan kemampuan mengajarkan dogma-dogma agamanya. Bahkan ada orang tua si gadis yang bangga apabila anaknya menikah dengan si “pembela agama”.
Kebodohan bukan hanya milik warga desa tetangga Nurdin ini, kebodohan juga merupakan milik dari kepala desa dan aparatnya. Sikap untuk dilayan dan bukan melayanani merupakan ciri sikap kepala desa dan aparatnya hampi seluruh desa di negeri ini, merupakan indikator yang harus dimiliki oleh kepala desa dan aparatnya agar mereka dapat dipandang sebagai penguasa dan berbeda status sosialnya dengan warga desa. Kebodohan juga menjadi milik dari pihak kepolisian, kabarnya si teroris ini pernah ditangkap di jalan raya lalu dilepaskan setelah diberikan duit oleh Nurdin, maka si Nurdin pun tersenyum dan dalam hatinya berkata”goblok dipelihara”. Pimpinan Polri merasa malu atas perbuatan oknum polisi, maka diberikan photo sang teroris kepada polisi jalan raya agar tidak tertipu lagi. Ternyata sembilan tahun pun polisi masih tertipu.Tertipu nih ye, ah..jangan-jangan tertipu lagi kalau tidak segera menemukan pelaku teror lainnya.
Ketika masih hidup si Nurdin “tidak” Top menjadi berita, dan ketika mati pun dia menjadi berita. Kematian Nurdin “tidak” Top menjadi menu yang lezat bagi pers dan pengamat teroris. Karena matinya gembong ini tidak berarti negeri ini aman dari aksi teror, aksi-aksi teror tetap eksis karena para pengikutnya akan tetap beraksi bahkan diramal akan melakukan aksi yang lebih sadis dan brutal. Ideologi berkembang pada nilai-nilai kenajisan dan sasaran aksi pengeboman bukan hanya kepada pemerintah Amerika serikat dan warga asing tetapi kepada pemerintah dan warga masyarakat Indonesia sendiri. Saudara kandung dan saudara tirinya pun bisa menjadi sasaran aksi bomnya apabila bertentang dengan ideologi yang dianutnya. Jangan-jangan aparat koruptor yang sedang dipenjara akan dibom juga, kalau ini mungkin saja masyarakat akan memandang berbeda terhadap teroris, bahkan adanya pembenaran terhadap aksinya.
Artinya bahwa aksi teroris yang belum tertangkap sampai saat ini perlu diwaspadahi karena aksinya akan lebih brutal dari pada aksi-aksi sebelumnya karena terjadi perubahan ideology dan sasaran akan menjadi lebih luas.Anehnya sampai saat ini para teroris dan jaringannya belum tertangkap. Masyarakat mungkin menduga bahwa para jaringan radikalisme ditunggu sampai menjadi kelas “buaya” dan bukan kelas “cecak”, artinya dibiarkan dahulu mempermahirkan diri dengan aksi pengeboman yang mengejutkan dunia, maka barulah polisi dengan pasukan elitenya Dansus 88 beraksi. Jika yang dilawan hanya kelas “cecak” berarti tidak seruh karena tidak seimbang kemampuan dan tingkat keterampilan dari kedua pihak. Memangnya koboi.
Harapan masyarakat menghendaki jaringan teroris ini diberantas sampai ke akar-akarnya. Tetapi apabila akarnya ditanamkan kepada bayi yang masih dalam kandungan, maka sudah pasti sangat sulit diberantas. Apakah mungkin terjadi seperti itu dalam merekrut generasi terorisnya. Cara seperti ini adalah cara yang paling mudah, aman dan sistematis. Dedengkot terorisisme belum juga tertangkap, maka ada kemungkinan cara ini sudah dilaksanakan. Selama mereka belum tertangkap oleh polisi, maka semakin banyak kesempatan mereka melahirkan bayi-bayi sebagai calon teroris. Artinya polisi memberikan kesempatan kepada gembong teroris untuk menjalan misinya ini. Polisi akan semakin sulit memberantas terorisme. Polisi dianggap sebagai pembunuh bayi dan anak, maka akan semakin gawat keberadaan polisi, polisi mendapat kecaman dari komisi perlindungan anak dan kelompok peduli anak.
Pelaku bom bunuh diri dipandang oleh jaringan teroris ini sebagai pahlawan dan langsung masuk surga. Tetapi dalam perspektif Nasir Abbas bahwa pelaku bom bunuh diri ini adalah manusia tidak berguna, manusia paling bodoh karena tidak mempunyai kemampuan dan keterampilan yang diperlukan dalam organisasi jaringan teroris. Si ” pengantin” cukup dikorbankan saja sebagai pelaku pembawa bom bunuh diri. Kepribadian yang tidak stabil karena kehidupannya berantakan dan ditambah dengan pengetahuan agama sangat rendah, serta ditambah lagi dengan tingkat pendidikan rendah dan putus sekolah menjadi sangat mudah didoktrinisasikan oleh para pembina dalam jaringan organisasi teroris. Para pelaku teroris yang akan dikuburkan ini saja sangat sulit dan mendapat penolakan dari warga setempat, bagaimana pula pelaku ini bisa masuk ke surga, di bumi saja ditolak. Mungkin bisa juga masuk ke surga, karena sudah sangat marahnya malaikat melihat kelakuan yanga sangat biadab sehingga ditendang sekencang-kencangnya sehingga lewat dari api neraka dan masuk ke surga. Kalau malaikat itu punya rasa emosi.
Sembilan tahun melakukan aksi-aksi pengeboman di berbagai tempat di negeri yang multi kultural, multi etnis, multi bahasa, dan kaya akan sumber alam. Negeri itu adlah Indonesia. Indonesia yang kaya dan multi aspek tersebut justru dijadikan arena bagi aksi biadab dari si individu yang bernama Nurdin M Top. Akhirnya, Nurdin M Top ini mati ditembak oleh pasukan Dansus 88. Berakhirlah nyawa Nurdin ini dan berakhir pula episode aksi Nurdin M Top, maka jadilah Nurdin yang tidak Top lagi. Tertembaknya Nurdin yang tidak Top ini pada hari tanggal yang tidak perlu dingat, karena adanya kecemburuan dari sebagian warga terutama para korban dari aksi pengeboman dimana keluarga mati karena di bom justru tidak dingat hari maupun tanggalnya, misalnya kapan dan pada hari apa korban yang kritis meninggal di rumah sakit . Tidak tahu bukan, lalu kenapa harus dingat hari dan tanggal kematian si Nurdin yang tidak Top lagi ini.
Nurdin “tidak” Top dengan gagahnya berlalang buana selama sembilan tahun, dari satu pulau pindah ke pulau lain, dari satu kota pindah ke kota lain dengan gampangnya dan tanpa diketahui oleh warga setempat. Ketika tinggal di negeri kelahirnya saja, si Nurdin “tidak” Top ini merasakan tidak nyaman, selalu dikejar-kejar dan akan ditangkap oleh pemerintah Malaysia. Dari hasil observasi dan informasi bahwa Negara Indonesia adalah tempat yang sangat aman dan nyaman untuk tinggal dan hidup bagi para teroris, maka Nurdin “tidak” Top berangkat ke Indonesia, dan meninggalkan Malaysia, tanpa adanya kecurigaan dari pihak pemerintah Indonesia terutama pihak imigrasi airport kalau dia berangkat dengan pesawat udara, atau tidak perduli pihak beacukai dan pihak polisi pelabuhan laut kalau si Nurdin ini melalu jalan laut. Sudah merupakan rahasia warga asing bahwa masuk ke Indonesia sangat mudah hanya dengan memberikan uang tip yang berlebihan maka lolos untuk tinggal dan hidup di negeri ini. Memang saat itu birokrasi pemerintahan sangat bobrok sejak ditinggalkan oleh almarhum Bapak Soeharto yang diganti dengan pemerintahan reformasi. Mungkin masih dalam suasana eforia reformasi, kewaspadaan berkurang.
Nurdin “tidak” Top hidup dengan tanpa adanya gangguan dan kejaran dari pemerintah Indonesia maka dengan rasa aman merencanakan aksi pengeboman secara terencana dengan baik dan terbukti dalam pelaksaannya pengeboman berjalan dengan mulus tanpa tertangkap oleh pihak berwajib. Kembali hidup di desa dan menikah dengan anak gadis desa yang lugu dan bodoh. Kepala desa dan aparat desa serta masyarakat sekitarnya tidak mau perduli dengan warga baru yang tinggal dan hidup di sekitarnya. Budaya sungkan yang dimiliki dari warga desa untuk mencari tahu lebih banyak informasi tentang warga barunya. Atau karena kebodohan yang dikarenakan rendahnya tingkat pendidikan warga masyarakat sehingga warga masyarakat tidak mampu bersikap kritis. Tentu saja karena hal ini lebih disebabkan kaena otak Nurdin ini sangat cerdas bisa mencari tempat yang warganya mayoritas bodoh dari tingkat pendidikan maupun rendahnya pengetahuan agamanya sehingga dengan mudah mempengaruhi warga desa dengan dalil-dalil agama yang mahir dimiliki oleh si Nurdin yang tidak Top lagi ini. Gadis desa sangat mudah dirayu dengan kemampuan bercinta yang luar biasa ditambah dengan tampan wajahnya yang membuat gadis desa tergoda untuk mau menjadi isteri. Orang tua si gadis dapat mudah ditundukan dengan memperlihatkan kemampuan mengajarkan dogma-dogma agamanya. Bahkan ada orang tua si gadis yang bangga apabila anaknya menikah dengan si “pembela agama”.
Kebodohan bukan hanya milik warga desa tetangga Nurdin ini, kebodohan juga merupakan milik dari kepala desa dan aparatnya. Sikap untuk dilayan dan bukan melayanani merupakan ciri sikap kepala desa dan aparatnya hampi seluruh desa di negeri ini, merupakan indikator yang harus dimiliki oleh kepala desa dan aparatnya agar mereka dapat dipandang sebagai penguasa dan berbeda status sosialnya dengan warga desa. Kebodohan juga menjadi milik dari pihak kepolisian, kabarnya si teroris ini pernah ditangkap di jalan raya lalu dilepaskan setelah diberikan duit oleh Nurdin, maka si Nurdin pun tersenyum dan dalam hatinya berkata”goblok dipelihara”. Pimpinan Polri merasa malu atas perbuatan oknum polisi, maka diberikan photo sang teroris kepada polisi jalan raya agar tidak tertipu lagi. Ternyata sembilan tahun pun polisi masih tertipu.Tertipu nih ye, ah..jangan-jangan tertipu lagi kalau tidak segera menemukan pelaku teror lainnya.
Ketika masih hidup si Nurdin “tidak” Top menjadi berita, dan ketika mati pun dia menjadi berita. Kematian Nurdin “tidak” Top menjadi menu yang lezat bagi pers dan pengamat teroris. Karena matinya gembong ini tidak berarti negeri ini aman dari aksi teror, aksi-aksi teror tetap eksis karena para pengikutnya akan tetap beraksi bahkan diramal akan melakukan aksi yang lebih sadis dan brutal. Ideologi berkembang pada nilai-nilai kenajisan dan sasaran aksi pengeboman bukan hanya kepada pemerintah Amerika serikat dan warga asing tetapi kepada pemerintah dan warga masyarakat Indonesia sendiri. Saudara kandung dan saudara tirinya pun bisa menjadi sasaran aksi bomnya apabila bertentang dengan ideologi yang dianutnya. Jangan-jangan aparat koruptor yang sedang dipenjara akan dibom juga, kalau ini mungkin saja masyarakat akan memandang berbeda terhadap teroris, bahkan adanya pembenaran terhadap aksinya.
Artinya bahwa aksi teroris yang belum tertangkap sampai saat ini perlu diwaspadahi karena aksinya akan lebih brutal dari pada aksi-aksi sebelumnya karena terjadi perubahan ideology dan sasaran akan menjadi lebih luas.Anehnya sampai saat ini para teroris dan jaringannya belum tertangkap. Masyarakat mungkin menduga bahwa para jaringan radikalisme ditunggu sampai menjadi kelas “buaya” dan bukan kelas “cecak”, artinya dibiarkan dahulu mempermahirkan diri dengan aksi pengeboman yang mengejutkan dunia, maka barulah polisi dengan pasukan elitenya Dansus 88 beraksi. Jika yang dilawan hanya kelas “cecak” berarti tidak seruh karena tidak seimbang kemampuan dan tingkat keterampilan dari kedua pihak. Memangnya koboi.
Harapan masyarakat menghendaki jaringan teroris ini diberantas sampai ke akar-akarnya. Tetapi apabila akarnya ditanamkan kepada bayi yang masih dalam kandungan, maka sudah pasti sangat sulit diberantas. Apakah mungkin terjadi seperti itu dalam merekrut generasi terorisnya. Cara seperti ini adalah cara yang paling mudah, aman dan sistematis. Dedengkot terorisisme belum juga tertangkap, maka ada kemungkinan cara ini sudah dilaksanakan. Selama mereka belum tertangkap oleh polisi, maka semakin banyak kesempatan mereka melahirkan bayi-bayi sebagai calon teroris. Artinya polisi memberikan kesempatan kepada gembong teroris untuk menjalan misinya ini. Polisi akan semakin sulit memberantas terorisme. Polisi dianggap sebagai pembunuh bayi dan anak, maka akan semakin gawat keberadaan polisi, polisi mendapat kecaman dari komisi perlindungan anak dan kelompok peduli anak.
Pelaku bom bunuh diri dipandang oleh jaringan teroris ini sebagai pahlawan dan langsung masuk surga. Tetapi dalam perspektif Nasir Abbas bahwa pelaku bom bunuh diri ini adalah manusia tidak berguna, manusia paling bodoh karena tidak mempunyai kemampuan dan keterampilan yang diperlukan dalam organisasi jaringan teroris. Si ” pengantin” cukup dikorbankan saja sebagai pelaku pembawa bom bunuh diri. Kepribadian yang tidak stabil karena kehidupannya berantakan dan ditambah dengan pengetahuan agama sangat rendah, serta ditambah lagi dengan tingkat pendidikan rendah dan putus sekolah menjadi sangat mudah didoktrinisasikan oleh para pembina dalam jaringan organisasi teroris. Para pelaku teroris yang akan dikuburkan ini saja sangat sulit dan mendapat penolakan dari warga setempat, bagaimana pula pelaku ini bisa masuk ke surga, di bumi saja ditolak. Mungkin bisa juga masuk ke surga, karena sudah sangat marahnya malaikat melihat kelakuan yanga sangat biadab sehingga ditendang sekencang-kencangnya sehingga lewat dari api neraka dan masuk ke surga. Kalau malaikat itu punya rasa emosi.
Wednesday 16 September 2009
DIRI SOSIAL (SOCIAL SELF)
Manusia mengetahui bagaimana konsep dirinya terbentuk, dan dimana seseorang mendapatkan gambaran tentang dirinya, dan juga bagaimana mengevaluasi dirinya. Terlebih lagi bagaimana seseorang harus menyajikan atau mempresentasikan dirinya secara benar. Dalam hal ini penulis mencoba menggambarkan permasalahan tersebut dalam tulisan ini.
Interaksi Sosial dan Konsep Diri
Breen dan Kassin (1993) menjelaskan konsep diri adalah keyakinan yang dimiliki individu tentang ciri-ciri sifat yang dimiliki. Sedangkan Worchel (2000) menegaskan bahwa konsep diri adalah pengetahuan dan keyakinan yang dimiliki individu tentang karakteristik atau ciri-ciri pribadinya.
Siapakah diri kita ? Untuk mengenal diri kita maka perlu dipelajari melalui pengalaman dari interaksi dengan orang lain, yaitu dengan menemukan apa yang orang lain pikirkan tentang kita. Jadi refleted appraisal penting bagi konsep diri karena dapat menaksir diri kita dengan merefleksikan atau bercermin bagaimana orang lain menaksir kita.
Perbandingan sosial (social comparison) perlu dilakukan karena ada keraguan terhadap kemampuan atau pendapatnya atau informasi obyektif tidak ada maka dilakukan perbandingan dengan orang lain. Jadi melakukan perbandingan diri anda dari orang lain sangat penting untuk : (1) mengevaluasi diri sendiri; (2) dapat memperbaiki diri; (3) dapat meningkatkan diri sendiri. Tetapi hal yang harus disadari bahwa perbandingan sosial juga dapat memperbutruk konsep diri anda selain memperbaiki penampilan yang positif.
Harga Diri (Self Esteem)
Kalau konsep diri adalah komponen kognitif, maka harga diri adalah komponen evaluatif dari konsep diri, yang terdiri dari evaluasi positif dan negatif tentang diri sendiri yang dimiliki seseorang (Worchel,2000).
Michener dan Delamater (1999) mengungkapkan beberapa sumber penting dalam pembentukan atau perkembangan harga diri, yaitu pengalaman dalam keluarga, umpan balik terhadap performance dan perbandingan sosial. Sedangkan Coopersmith (1967) menjelaskan ada empat tipe perilaku orang tua dapat menningkatkan harga diri, yaitu : (1) menunjukkan penerimaan afeksi, minat, dan keterlibatan pada kejadian-kejadian atau kegiatan yang dialami anak; (2) menerapkan batasan-batasan jelas pada perilaku anak secara teguh dan konsisten; (3) memberikan kebebasan dalam batas-batas dan menghargai inisiatif; (4) bentuk disiplin yang tidak memaksa.
Umpan balik setiap hari tentang kualitas penampilan baik kesuksesan atau kegagalan akan mempengaruhi harga diri. Dengan kata lain, harga diri dibentuk berdasarkan perasaan kita tentang kemampuan dan kekuasaan untuk mengendalikan kejadian-kejadian yang menimpa diri kita. Demikian halnya, perbandingan sosial sangat besar pengaruhnya pada pembentukan penampilan kita.
Apabila kita menilai dirinya positif cenderung untuk bahagia, sehat, berhasil dan dapat menyesuaikan diri dengan orangan lain. Sebaliknya orang yang menilai dirinya negatif maka secara relatif tidak sehat, tertekan, dan pesimis tentang masa depan serta cenderung gagal. Dalam interkasi sosial maka orang yang harga dirinya rendah akan cenderung selalu gagal karena selalu beraksi terhadap kerentanan untuk terluka/tersakiti hatinya. Sebaliknya, harga diri yang tinggi lebih mengedapankan tindakan-tindakan yang dapat memperteguh dan meningkatkan hubungan dan untuk melawan peremehan yang dipersepsikan terhadap dirinya.
Kesadaran Diri (Self-Awarness)
Apa yang dimaksud dengan kesadaran diri ? Bringham (1991) menegaskan bahwa harga diri adalah derajad perhatian diarahkan ke dalam untuk memusatkan perhatian pada aspek-aspek dari diri sendiri. Tetapi harus ingat bahwa hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa orang yang lebih terserap dirinya atau lebih perhatian ke dalam dirinya sendiri pada umumnya lebih mungkin menderita depresi, kecemasan, penyalahgunaan alkohol dan gangguan klinis lainnya. Namun demikian, kesadaran diri adalah hal yang sangat penting untk memhami konsep diri dan standar nilai serta tujuan yang dimiliki seseorang. Kesadaran diri yang tinggi akan bertingkah laku dalam cara-cara yang lebih konsisten dengan sikap dan nilai yang dimiliki.
Menurut Buch (1980) terdapat dua jenis kesadaran, yaitu kesadaran diri pribadi dan kesadaran diri publik. Kesadaran diri pribadi adalah ketika perhatian difokuskan pada aspek-aspek yang relatif pribadi dari diri, seperti mood, persepsi, dan perasaannya. Sedangkan kesadaran diri publik adalah ketika perhatian diarahkan pada aspek-aspek tentang diri yang kelihatan pada orang lain, seperti penampilan dan tindakan-tindakan sosial. Jadi orang yang kesadaran pribadi yang tinggi selalu memusatkan perhatian pada identitas diri dan sangat perhatian dengan pikiran dan perasaannya. Sedangkan kesadaran diri publik yang tinggi lebih menaru perhatian pada identitas sosial dan reaksi orang lain terhadap dirinya.
Presentasi Diri (Self Presentation)
Mengungkapkan diri pada orang lain disebut presentasi diri. Dalam mengungkapkan diri dilakukan pembentukan dan pengelolaan kesan agar orang lain menyukai atau mempengaruhi orang lain, atau memperbaiki posisi, atau memelihara status.
Goffman mengajukan syarat-syrat untuk mengelola kesan secara baik. Syarat-syarat tersebut adalah:
1.Penampilan muka
Yakni perlikau harus diekspresikan secara khusus agar diketahui secara jelas peran si pelaku, maka dioperlukan aspek setting yaitu serangkaian peralatan ruang dan benda yang digunakan. Aspek kedua, appearence yaitu penggunaan petunjuk artifaktual, misal pakaian, atribut dan lai-lain. Dan aspek ketiga adalah manner yaitu gaya bertingkalaku misal cara bicara, cara berjalan dan lain-lain.
2.Syarat kedua: keterlibatan dalam perannya.
Artinya aktor sepenuhnya terlibat dalam perannya.
3.Syarat ketiga : mewujudkan idealisasi harapan orang lain tentang perannya.
4.Syarat lainnya adalah mystification.
Yaitu memelihara jarak sosial tertentu diantara aktor dan orang lain.
Presentasi diri dilakukan dengan bebrapa strategi-strategi yaitu :
1.Mengambil Muka/Menjilat (Ingratiation).
Strategi ini banyak dilakukan setiap orang secara mudah.
2.Mengancam atau Menakut-nakuti (Intimidation)
Penjilat ingin disukai, tetapi intimidasi justru ingin ditakuti orang.
3.Promosi diri (Self Promotion)
Startegi ini dilakukan dengan cara menggambarkan kekuatan-kekuatan dan berusaha untuk memberikan kesan melalui prestasi.
4.Pemberian contoh / teladan (Exemplification).
Strategi ini dilakukan dengan cara memproyeksikan penghargaannya pada lejujuran dan moralitas.
5.Permohonan (Supplification).
Strategi dilakukan dengan cara memperlihatkan kelemhan atau ketergantungan untuk mendapatkan pertolongan atau simpati.
Kemampuan seseorang melakukan presentasi diri dapat berbeda pada setiap orang karena sangat tergantung pada faktor ciri sifat kepribadian yang disebut self monitoring. Bringham (1991) mengatakan bahwa self monitoring adalah suatu proses dimana individu melakukan pemantauan terhadap pengelolaan kesan yang telah dilakukannya. Jadi individu yang mampu mempresentasikan beberapa perilaku dalam situasi-situasi yang berbeda atau menyesuaikan harapan orang lain disebut high self monitors atau disebut juga pengelola kesan yang lihai (skilled impresion managers)
2009wils
Interaksi Sosial dan Konsep Diri
Breen dan Kassin (1993) menjelaskan konsep diri adalah keyakinan yang dimiliki individu tentang ciri-ciri sifat yang dimiliki. Sedangkan Worchel (2000) menegaskan bahwa konsep diri adalah pengetahuan dan keyakinan yang dimiliki individu tentang karakteristik atau ciri-ciri pribadinya.
Siapakah diri kita ? Untuk mengenal diri kita maka perlu dipelajari melalui pengalaman dari interaksi dengan orang lain, yaitu dengan menemukan apa yang orang lain pikirkan tentang kita. Jadi refleted appraisal penting bagi konsep diri karena dapat menaksir diri kita dengan merefleksikan atau bercermin bagaimana orang lain menaksir kita.
Perbandingan sosial (social comparison) perlu dilakukan karena ada keraguan terhadap kemampuan atau pendapatnya atau informasi obyektif tidak ada maka dilakukan perbandingan dengan orang lain. Jadi melakukan perbandingan diri anda dari orang lain sangat penting untuk : (1) mengevaluasi diri sendiri; (2) dapat memperbaiki diri; (3) dapat meningkatkan diri sendiri. Tetapi hal yang harus disadari bahwa perbandingan sosial juga dapat memperbutruk konsep diri anda selain memperbaiki penampilan yang positif.
Harga Diri (Self Esteem)
Kalau konsep diri adalah komponen kognitif, maka harga diri adalah komponen evaluatif dari konsep diri, yang terdiri dari evaluasi positif dan negatif tentang diri sendiri yang dimiliki seseorang (Worchel,2000).
Michener dan Delamater (1999) mengungkapkan beberapa sumber penting dalam pembentukan atau perkembangan harga diri, yaitu pengalaman dalam keluarga, umpan balik terhadap performance dan perbandingan sosial. Sedangkan Coopersmith (1967) menjelaskan ada empat tipe perilaku orang tua dapat menningkatkan harga diri, yaitu : (1) menunjukkan penerimaan afeksi, minat, dan keterlibatan pada kejadian-kejadian atau kegiatan yang dialami anak; (2) menerapkan batasan-batasan jelas pada perilaku anak secara teguh dan konsisten; (3) memberikan kebebasan dalam batas-batas dan menghargai inisiatif; (4) bentuk disiplin yang tidak memaksa.
Umpan balik setiap hari tentang kualitas penampilan baik kesuksesan atau kegagalan akan mempengaruhi harga diri. Dengan kata lain, harga diri dibentuk berdasarkan perasaan kita tentang kemampuan dan kekuasaan untuk mengendalikan kejadian-kejadian yang menimpa diri kita. Demikian halnya, perbandingan sosial sangat besar pengaruhnya pada pembentukan penampilan kita.
Apabila kita menilai dirinya positif cenderung untuk bahagia, sehat, berhasil dan dapat menyesuaikan diri dengan orangan lain. Sebaliknya orang yang menilai dirinya negatif maka secara relatif tidak sehat, tertekan, dan pesimis tentang masa depan serta cenderung gagal. Dalam interkasi sosial maka orang yang harga dirinya rendah akan cenderung selalu gagal karena selalu beraksi terhadap kerentanan untuk terluka/tersakiti hatinya. Sebaliknya, harga diri yang tinggi lebih mengedapankan tindakan-tindakan yang dapat memperteguh dan meningkatkan hubungan dan untuk melawan peremehan yang dipersepsikan terhadap dirinya.
Kesadaran Diri (Self-Awarness)
Apa yang dimaksud dengan kesadaran diri ? Bringham (1991) menegaskan bahwa harga diri adalah derajad perhatian diarahkan ke dalam untuk memusatkan perhatian pada aspek-aspek dari diri sendiri. Tetapi harus ingat bahwa hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa orang yang lebih terserap dirinya atau lebih perhatian ke dalam dirinya sendiri pada umumnya lebih mungkin menderita depresi, kecemasan, penyalahgunaan alkohol dan gangguan klinis lainnya. Namun demikian, kesadaran diri adalah hal yang sangat penting untk memhami konsep diri dan standar nilai serta tujuan yang dimiliki seseorang. Kesadaran diri yang tinggi akan bertingkah laku dalam cara-cara yang lebih konsisten dengan sikap dan nilai yang dimiliki.
Menurut Buch (1980) terdapat dua jenis kesadaran, yaitu kesadaran diri pribadi dan kesadaran diri publik. Kesadaran diri pribadi adalah ketika perhatian difokuskan pada aspek-aspek yang relatif pribadi dari diri, seperti mood, persepsi, dan perasaannya. Sedangkan kesadaran diri publik adalah ketika perhatian diarahkan pada aspek-aspek tentang diri yang kelihatan pada orang lain, seperti penampilan dan tindakan-tindakan sosial. Jadi orang yang kesadaran pribadi yang tinggi selalu memusatkan perhatian pada identitas diri dan sangat perhatian dengan pikiran dan perasaannya. Sedangkan kesadaran diri publik yang tinggi lebih menaru perhatian pada identitas sosial dan reaksi orang lain terhadap dirinya.
Presentasi Diri (Self Presentation)
Mengungkapkan diri pada orang lain disebut presentasi diri. Dalam mengungkapkan diri dilakukan pembentukan dan pengelolaan kesan agar orang lain menyukai atau mempengaruhi orang lain, atau memperbaiki posisi, atau memelihara status.
Goffman mengajukan syarat-syrat untuk mengelola kesan secara baik. Syarat-syarat tersebut adalah:
1.Penampilan muka
Yakni perlikau harus diekspresikan secara khusus agar diketahui secara jelas peran si pelaku, maka dioperlukan aspek setting yaitu serangkaian peralatan ruang dan benda yang digunakan. Aspek kedua, appearence yaitu penggunaan petunjuk artifaktual, misal pakaian, atribut dan lai-lain. Dan aspek ketiga adalah manner yaitu gaya bertingkalaku misal cara bicara, cara berjalan dan lain-lain.
2.Syarat kedua: keterlibatan dalam perannya.
Artinya aktor sepenuhnya terlibat dalam perannya.
3.Syarat ketiga : mewujudkan idealisasi harapan orang lain tentang perannya.
4.Syarat lainnya adalah mystification.
Yaitu memelihara jarak sosial tertentu diantara aktor dan orang lain.
Presentasi diri dilakukan dengan bebrapa strategi-strategi yaitu :
1.Mengambil Muka/Menjilat (Ingratiation).
Strategi ini banyak dilakukan setiap orang secara mudah.
2.Mengancam atau Menakut-nakuti (Intimidation)
Penjilat ingin disukai, tetapi intimidasi justru ingin ditakuti orang.
3.Promosi diri (Self Promotion)
Startegi ini dilakukan dengan cara menggambarkan kekuatan-kekuatan dan berusaha untuk memberikan kesan melalui prestasi.
4.Pemberian contoh / teladan (Exemplification).
Strategi ini dilakukan dengan cara memproyeksikan penghargaannya pada lejujuran dan moralitas.
5.Permohonan (Supplification).
Strategi dilakukan dengan cara memperlihatkan kelemhan atau ketergantungan untuk mendapatkan pertolongan atau simpati.
Kemampuan seseorang melakukan presentasi diri dapat berbeda pada setiap orang karena sangat tergantung pada faktor ciri sifat kepribadian yang disebut self monitoring. Bringham (1991) mengatakan bahwa self monitoring adalah suatu proses dimana individu melakukan pemantauan terhadap pengelolaan kesan yang telah dilakukannya. Jadi individu yang mampu mempresentasikan beberapa perilaku dalam situasi-situasi yang berbeda atau menyesuaikan harapan orang lain disebut high self monitors atau disebut juga pengelola kesan yang lihai (skilled impresion managers)
2009wils
Tuesday 8 September 2009
PERLINDUNGAN ANAK ALA KAK SETO
Kak Seto dituntut oleh seorang ibu karena melakukan penculikan terhadap anaknya. Bermula dari laporan seorang bapak yang melaporkan bahwa anaknya merasa tidak nyaman tinggal bersama ibunya, dikarenakan perlakuan ibu sangat kasar terhadap anak-anaknya atau dengan kata yang sederhana bahwa telah terjadi tindak kekerasan terhadap anak. Atas dasar laporan yang disampaikan seorang bapak kepada Kak Seto, maka Kak Seto mengambil langkah secepatnya dengan menjemput anak tersebut untuk maksud mendapat perlindungan dari tindakan kekerasan yang dilakukan seorang ibu.
Dari kasus “penculikan anak” oleh Kak Seto, dapat diambil suatu hikmah yang sangat berharga menjadi pelajaran bagi semua pihak untuk lebih perduli dan ada kesadaran nasional dari semua pihak serta keinginan politik (political will) dari pemerintah bahwa permasalahan anak bukan permasalahan yang sederhana dan diperlukan suatu penanganan yang serius.
Obyek,bukan subyek
Anak yang dilahirkan dari rahim seorang ibu adalah titipan dari Sang Mulia kepada umat manusia untuk dibesarkan, dibimbing, dan dibina menjadi manusia yang berguna bagi umatnya. Dan anak adalah amanah dan karunia Tuhan Yang Maha Esa, yang dalam dirinya melekat harkat dan martabat sebagai manusia seutuhnya. Dalam perspektif negara, bahwa anak adalah tunas, potensi, dan generasi muda penerus cita-cita perjuangan bangsa, memiliki peran strategis dan mempunyai ciri dan sifat khusus yang menjamin kelangsungan eksistensi bangsa dan negara pada masa depan. Pernyataan ini tidak dapat terbantahkan dan merupakan landasan pada Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 23 tahun 2002 tentang Perlindungan Anak. Ironinya justru idiom ini hanya dipakai sebagai kalimat mutiara bagi pejabat pemerintah maupun orang yang menganggap perduli terhadap anak, tetapi dimanfaatkan untuk kepentingan pribadi dan kelompoknya untuk menjaring dana baik dari pemerintah maupun bantuan sosial dari negara lain. Uang mengalir maka kegiatan dapat terlaksana dengan berbagai program keperdulian anak, dan kantong-kantong pribadi dapat menampung pundi-pundi uang. Program disusun dimodifikasi sedemikian rupa dengan berbagai teori dan konsep yang membuat masyarakat terkagum-kagum.
Kak Seto yang mengendarai Komisi Perlindungan Anak di Indonesia melakukan tindakan pemisahan anak dari ibunya lebih didasarkan pada upaya perlindungan terhadap anak yang berlandaskan pada UU Perlindungan Anak, karena amanat dari undang-undang tersebut menegaskan bahwa anak harus mendapatkan perlindungan. Dalam pasal 1 dari UU RI Nomor 23 tahun 2002 menjelaskan bahwa perlindungan anak adalah segala kegiatan untuk menjamin dan melindungi anak dan hak-haknya agar dapat hidup, tumbuh, berkembang, dan berpartisipasi, secara optimal sesuai dengan harkat dan martabat kemanusiaan, serta mendapat perlindungan dari kekerasan dan diskriminasi.
Jadi tujuan dari pada tindakan perlindungan terhadap anak adalah untuk menjamin terpenuhinya hak-hak anak agar dapat hidup, tumbuh, berkembang, dan berpartisipasi secara optimal sesuai dengan harkat dan martabat kemanusiaan, serta mendapat perlindungan dari kekerasan dan diskriminasi, demi terwujudnya anak yang berkualitas, berakhlak mulia, dan sejahtera. Pertanyaan kita adalah apakah tindakan Kak Seto tersebut telah memenuhi kriteria dari perlindungan yang diamanatkan oleh undang-undang tersebut.
Apabila menyimak pernyataan Kak Seto bahwa perlindungan yang dilakukan adalah melakukan perlindungan khusus, karena anak tersebut mendapat perlakukan tindak kekerasan dari ibunya. Tindak kekerasan yang dilakukan oleh ibu tersebut harus dilakukan pemeriksaan secara obyektif yang berlandaskan pada KUHAP, artinya peran polisi harus dilibatkan dalam kasus ini untuk segera melakukan proses penyidikan. Jadi apabila belum terbukti secara hukum bahwa ibu tersebut melakukan tindak kekerasan maka tindakan yang dilakukan Kak Seto sudah dapat dikategorikan sebagai tindakan pelanggaran hukum. Pemisahaan seorang anak dari ibunya yang dilakukan Kak Seto berarti telah melanggar hak pada setiap anak untuk mendapatkan pengasuhan dari ibunya. Karena pasal 14 dalam UU Perlindungan Anak menjelaskan bahwa pemisahan anak dari ibunya harus ada alasan hukum dan/ atau aturan hukum yang sah menunjukkan bahwa pemisahan itu adalah demi kepentingan terbaik bagi anak dan merupakan pertimbangan terakhir. Alasan hukum yang sah harus dilakukan oleh pihak Kepolisian, tetapi dalam kasus ini pihak Kepolisian belum melakukan pembuktian adanya pelanggaran berupa tindakan kekerasan. Tidak ada alasan hukum dari Undang-Undang Nomor 23 tahun 2002 bahwa Kak Seto mempunyai kewenangan untuk melakukan perlindungan khusus kepada anak ini dengan cara melakukan pemisahan.
Tindakan pemisahan yang dilakukan oleh Kak Seto juga jelas melanggar pasal 69, bahwa perlindungan khusus bagi anak korban kekerasan harus dilakukan dengan upaya : a. penyebarluasan dan sosialisasi ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan yang melindungi anak korban tindak kekerasan; dan b. pemantauan, pelaporan, dan pemberian sanksi. Mestinya langkah pertama dilakukan oleh Kak Seto adalah memberikan penyuluhan hukum bahwa adanya peraturan perundang-undangan menegaskan adanya perlindungan khusus bagi anak dari tindakan kekerasan. Langkah kedua yang dilakukan adalah melakukan pemantauan terhadap ibu anak tersebut apakah ditemukan adanya tindakan kekerasan, dan apabila ditemukan adanya tindak kekerasan pada anak tersebut maka langkah selanjutnya adalah melaporkan kepada pihak Kepolisian untuk diambil tindakan hukum selanjutnya.
Dimana posisi dari anak tersebut dalam kerangka berpikir dan tindakan dari Kak Seto? Anak tidak ditempatkan pada posisi yang sebenarnya, anak diletakkan pada kepentingan semu dari Kak Seto yang seolah-olah untuk kebaikan dan perkembangan kepribadian si anak. Dengan memisahkan anak dari asuhan seorang ibu tentunya menimbulkan kerugian yang lebih parah bagi kedua pihak yaitu bagi anak dan bagi ibunya. Anak merasakan kehilangan rasa kasih sayang dari seorang ibu yang tentu saja sangat berpengaruh pada perkembangan kepribadian anak.Perasaan seorang ibu dipermainkan dan kewajiban seorang ibu dicabut oleh hanya seorang pribadi Kak Seto yang seharusnya melalui suatu proses hukum pada peradilan anak.
Keperdulian anak
Anak yang hidup di negeri yang berasaskan idiologi Pancasila tidak mendapatkan hak-hak seperti yang diatur dalam UU Nomor 23 tahun 2002 tentang Perlindungan Anak yang secara tegas diatur sebanyak 15 pasal tentang hak-hak anak. Undang-undang dibuat dengan sempurna tetapi dalam pelaksanaan belum dilakukan secara konsekuen. Hal ini terbukti banyak kasus anak-anak Indonesia kurang mendapatkan perhatian yang serius dari Negara dan Pemerintah yang diberikan tanggung jawab besar oleh Undang-undang. Elemen masyarakat lainnya jangan terlalu banyak mengharap kepada pemerintah dan negara dengan keterbatasan baik dari aspek dana dan fasilitas fisik serata sumber daya manusia yang kualitasnya masih sangat mementingkan kepentingan pribadi dari pada kepentingan anak. Pengusaha tidak hanya memikirkan keuntungan yang besar dengan memakai anak sebagai daya tarik produk dagangannya seperti kita lihat pada kasus dagang rumah realestate atau pada produk dagang lainnya. Anak orang msikin justru jumlahnya sangat besar karena kehidupan orang tuanya yang sangat miskin, sangat tidak mungkin kita menuntut banyak dari orang tuanya untuk memberikan hak-hak anak yang layak dalam hidupnya. Pembiaran terhadap kepentingan anak sudah kita lakukan saat ini, hal ini terlihat penataan lingkungan hidup yang layak bagi anak sudah tidak ada lagi di negeri yang kaya ini. Lalu anak yang berkualitas seperti apa yang akan kita dapatkan di masa yang akan datang ?
Dari kasus “penculikan anak” oleh Kak Seto, dapat diambil suatu hikmah yang sangat berharga menjadi pelajaran bagi semua pihak untuk lebih perduli dan ada kesadaran nasional dari semua pihak serta keinginan politik (political will) dari pemerintah bahwa permasalahan anak bukan permasalahan yang sederhana dan diperlukan suatu penanganan yang serius.
Obyek,bukan subyek
Anak yang dilahirkan dari rahim seorang ibu adalah titipan dari Sang Mulia kepada umat manusia untuk dibesarkan, dibimbing, dan dibina menjadi manusia yang berguna bagi umatnya. Dan anak adalah amanah dan karunia Tuhan Yang Maha Esa, yang dalam dirinya melekat harkat dan martabat sebagai manusia seutuhnya. Dalam perspektif negara, bahwa anak adalah tunas, potensi, dan generasi muda penerus cita-cita perjuangan bangsa, memiliki peran strategis dan mempunyai ciri dan sifat khusus yang menjamin kelangsungan eksistensi bangsa dan negara pada masa depan. Pernyataan ini tidak dapat terbantahkan dan merupakan landasan pada Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 23 tahun 2002 tentang Perlindungan Anak. Ironinya justru idiom ini hanya dipakai sebagai kalimat mutiara bagi pejabat pemerintah maupun orang yang menganggap perduli terhadap anak, tetapi dimanfaatkan untuk kepentingan pribadi dan kelompoknya untuk menjaring dana baik dari pemerintah maupun bantuan sosial dari negara lain. Uang mengalir maka kegiatan dapat terlaksana dengan berbagai program keperdulian anak, dan kantong-kantong pribadi dapat menampung pundi-pundi uang. Program disusun dimodifikasi sedemikian rupa dengan berbagai teori dan konsep yang membuat masyarakat terkagum-kagum.
Kak Seto yang mengendarai Komisi Perlindungan Anak di Indonesia melakukan tindakan pemisahan anak dari ibunya lebih didasarkan pada upaya perlindungan terhadap anak yang berlandaskan pada UU Perlindungan Anak, karena amanat dari undang-undang tersebut menegaskan bahwa anak harus mendapatkan perlindungan. Dalam pasal 1 dari UU RI Nomor 23 tahun 2002 menjelaskan bahwa perlindungan anak adalah segala kegiatan untuk menjamin dan melindungi anak dan hak-haknya agar dapat hidup, tumbuh, berkembang, dan berpartisipasi, secara optimal sesuai dengan harkat dan martabat kemanusiaan, serta mendapat perlindungan dari kekerasan dan diskriminasi.
Jadi tujuan dari pada tindakan perlindungan terhadap anak adalah untuk menjamin terpenuhinya hak-hak anak agar dapat hidup, tumbuh, berkembang, dan berpartisipasi secara optimal sesuai dengan harkat dan martabat kemanusiaan, serta mendapat perlindungan dari kekerasan dan diskriminasi, demi terwujudnya anak yang berkualitas, berakhlak mulia, dan sejahtera. Pertanyaan kita adalah apakah tindakan Kak Seto tersebut telah memenuhi kriteria dari perlindungan yang diamanatkan oleh undang-undang tersebut.
Apabila menyimak pernyataan Kak Seto bahwa perlindungan yang dilakukan adalah melakukan perlindungan khusus, karena anak tersebut mendapat perlakukan tindak kekerasan dari ibunya. Tindak kekerasan yang dilakukan oleh ibu tersebut harus dilakukan pemeriksaan secara obyektif yang berlandaskan pada KUHAP, artinya peran polisi harus dilibatkan dalam kasus ini untuk segera melakukan proses penyidikan. Jadi apabila belum terbukti secara hukum bahwa ibu tersebut melakukan tindak kekerasan maka tindakan yang dilakukan Kak Seto sudah dapat dikategorikan sebagai tindakan pelanggaran hukum. Pemisahaan seorang anak dari ibunya yang dilakukan Kak Seto berarti telah melanggar hak pada setiap anak untuk mendapatkan pengasuhan dari ibunya. Karena pasal 14 dalam UU Perlindungan Anak menjelaskan bahwa pemisahan anak dari ibunya harus ada alasan hukum dan/ atau aturan hukum yang sah menunjukkan bahwa pemisahan itu adalah demi kepentingan terbaik bagi anak dan merupakan pertimbangan terakhir. Alasan hukum yang sah harus dilakukan oleh pihak Kepolisian, tetapi dalam kasus ini pihak Kepolisian belum melakukan pembuktian adanya pelanggaran berupa tindakan kekerasan. Tidak ada alasan hukum dari Undang-Undang Nomor 23 tahun 2002 bahwa Kak Seto mempunyai kewenangan untuk melakukan perlindungan khusus kepada anak ini dengan cara melakukan pemisahan.
Tindakan pemisahan yang dilakukan oleh Kak Seto juga jelas melanggar pasal 69, bahwa perlindungan khusus bagi anak korban kekerasan harus dilakukan dengan upaya : a. penyebarluasan dan sosialisasi ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan yang melindungi anak korban tindak kekerasan; dan b. pemantauan, pelaporan, dan pemberian sanksi. Mestinya langkah pertama dilakukan oleh Kak Seto adalah memberikan penyuluhan hukum bahwa adanya peraturan perundang-undangan menegaskan adanya perlindungan khusus bagi anak dari tindakan kekerasan. Langkah kedua yang dilakukan adalah melakukan pemantauan terhadap ibu anak tersebut apakah ditemukan adanya tindakan kekerasan, dan apabila ditemukan adanya tindak kekerasan pada anak tersebut maka langkah selanjutnya adalah melaporkan kepada pihak Kepolisian untuk diambil tindakan hukum selanjutnya.
Dimana posisi dari anak tersebut dalam kerangka berpikir dan tindakan dari Kak Seto? Anak tidak ditempatkan pada posisi yang sebenarnya, anak diletakkan pada kepentingan semu dari Kak Seto yang seolah-olah untuk kebaikan dan perkembangan kepribadian si anak. Dengan memisahkan anak dari asuhan seorang ibu tentunya menimbulkan kerugian yang lebih parah bagi kedua pihak yaitu bagi anak dan bagi ibunya. Anak merasakan kehilangan rasa kasih sayang dari seorang ibu yang tentu saja sangat berpengaruh pada perkembangan kepribadian anak.Perasaan seorang ibu dipermainkan dan kewajiban seorang ibu dicabut oleh hanya seorang pribadi Kak Seto yang seharusnya melalui suatu proses hukum pada peradilan anak.
Keperdulian anak
Anak yang hidup di negeri yang berasaskan idiologi Pancasila tidak mendapatkan hak-hak seperti yang diatur dalam UU Nomor 23 tahun 2002 tentang Perlindungan Anak yang secara tegas diatur sebanyak 15 pasal tentang hak-hak anak. Undang-undang dibuat dengan sempurna tetapi dalam pelaksanaan belum dilakukan secara konsekuen. Hal ini terbukti banyak kasus anak-anak Indonesia kurang mendapatkan perhatian yang serius dari Negara dan Pemerintah yang diberikan tanggung jawab besar oleh Undang-undang. Elemen masyarakat lainnya jangan terlalu banyak mengharap kepada pemerintah dan negara dengan keterbatasan baik dari aspek dana dan fasilitas fisik serata sumber daya manusia yang kualitasnya masih sangat mementingkan kepentingan pribadi dari pada kepentingan anak. Pengusaha tidak hanya memikirkan keuntungan yang besar dengan memakai anak sebagai daya tarik produk dagangannya seperti kita lihat pada kasus dagang rumah realestate atau pada produk dagang lainnya. Anak orang msikin justru jumlahnya sangat besar karena kehidupan orang tuanya yang sangat miskin, sangat tidak mungkin kita menuntut banyak dari orang tuanya untuk memberikan hak-hak anak yang layak dalam hidupnya. Pembiaran terhadap kepentingan anak sudah kita lakukan saat ini, hal ini terlihat penataan lingkungan hidup yang layak bagi anak sudah tidak ada lagi di negeri yang kaya ini. Lalu anak yang berkualitas seperti apa yang akan kita dapatkan di masa yang akan datang ?
Tuesday 16 June 2009
FORMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Batterers use a wide range of coercive and abusive behaviors against their victims. Some of the abusive behaviors used by batterers result in physical injuries. Other techniques employed by batterers involve emotionally abusive behaviors. While these behaviors may not result in physical injuries, they are still psychologically damaging to the victim. Batterers employ different abusive behaviors at different times. Even a single incident of physical violence or the threat of such violence may be sufficient to establish power and control over a partner; this power and control is then reinforced and strengthened by non-physical abusive and coercive behaviors.
Forms of domestic violence can include physical violence, sexual violence, economic control, and psychological assault (including threats of violence and physical harm, attacks against property or pets and other acts of intimidation, emotional abuse, isolation, and use of the children as a means of control). Because they occur in intimate relationships, many kinds of abuse are often not recognized as violence. In many places throughout the world, marital rape is still not viewed as sexual assault because a husband is deemed to have a right of sexual access to his wife. Stalking, as well, has only recently been recognized as a form of violence and a severe threat to the victim.
A diagram called the "Power and Control Wheel," developed by the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project in Duluth, identifies the various behaviors that are used by batterers to gain power and control over their victims. The wheel demonstrates the relationship between physical and sexual violence and the tactics of intimidation, coercion, and manipulation that are often used by batterers.
Forms of domestic violence can include physical violence, sexual violence, economic control, and psychological assault (including threats of violence and physical harm, attacks against property or pets and other acts of intimidation, emotional abuse, isolation, and use of the children as a means of control). Because they occur in intimate relationships, many kinds of abuse are often not recognized as violence. In many places throughout the world, marital rape is still not viewed as sexual assault because a husband is deemed to have a right of sexual access to his wife. Stalking, as well, has only recently been recognized as a form of violence and a severe threat to the victim.
A diagram called the "Power and Control Wheel," developed by the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project in Duluth, identifies the various behaviors that are used by batterers to gain power and control over their victims. The wheel demonstrates the relationship between physical and sexual violence and the tactics of intimidation, coercion, and manipulation that are often used by batterers.
WHAT IS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?
Domestic violence is a pattern of abusive and threatening behaviors that may include physical, emotional, economic and sexual violence as well as intimidation, isolation and coercion. The purpose of domestic violence is to establish and exert power and control over another; men most often use it against their intimate partners, such as current or former spouses, girlfriends, or dating partners. While other forms of violence within the family are also serious, this site will address the unique characteristics of violence against women in their intimate relationships.
Domestic violence is behavior that is learned through observation and reinforcement in both the family and society. It is not caused by genetics or illness. Domestic violence is repeated because it works. Domestic violence allows the perpetrator to gain control of the victim through fear and intimidation. Gaining the victim's compliance, even temporarily, reinforces the perpetrator's use of these tactics of control. More importantly, however, the perpetrator's abusive behavior is reinforced by the socially sanctioned belief that men have the right to control women in relationships and the right to use force to ensure that control. From Anne L. Ganley & Susan Schechter, Domestic Violence: A National Curriculum for Family Preservation Practitioners 17-18 (1995).
Domestic violence is behavior that is learned through observation and reinforcement in both the family and society. It is not caused by genetics or illness. Domestic violence is repeated because it works. Domestic violence allows the perpetrator to gain control of the victim through fear and intimidation. Gaining the victim's compliance, even temporarily, reinforces the perpetrator's use of these tactics of control. More importantly, however, the perpetrator's abusive behavior is reinforced by the socially sanctioned belief that men have the right to control women in relationships and the right to use force to ensure that control. From Anne L. Ganley & Susan Schechter, Domestic Violence: A National Curriculum for Family Preservation Practitioners 17-18 (1995).
OTHER CAUSES AND COMPLICATING FACTORS
Domestic violence is a serious problem in all countries in which it has been studied in CEE/FSU. Women suffer high rates of violence in the home, including both physical and psychological violence.
Stereotypes about the "proper" roles and responsibilities of men and women in the family reinforce the view that the family is a self-contained unit, deserving privacy at the expense of other rights and freedoms. Traditionally, women are relegated to subordinate positions in this family structure. The Network Women's Program explains that in CEE/FSU:
Such attitudes endure in countries and communities that condone violence against women as a part of daily life. In some places, the goal of the community is "to save the family." Women are told: "Go back to your husbands. Do you want to make your children orphans?" In many cases, society teaches women that they are at least partly responsible for provoking the violence against them. "Good wives" seldom get beaten. And when they do, its excused as a sign of affection. As a Russian proverb puts it, "No beatings means there's no love."
From Network Women's Program, Bending the Bow: Targeting Women's Human Rights and Opportunities, Open Society Institute 24 (2002).
For victims of domestic violence, this notion of family privacy often interferes with effective police intervention and prosecutorial decisions in domestic violence cases. In many countries, people interviewed, including many police officers, reported that police often regard domestic violence as a minor offense and as a family issue in which police officers should not interfere.
These stereotypes also reinforce the mentality that men are the leaders of the family and thus have the right to control women's behavior by any means necessary. Women are expected to show their husbands obedience and respect. Women have identified the male view of women as subordinate to men as one of the underlying causes of violence against women. Many view violence as a normal part of an intimate relationship.
Research also indicates that many people accept the widespread myth that alcohol is the primary cause of domestic violence. Police, prosecutors, doctors, and others share this view that alcoholism causes domestic violence.
Research from around the world demonstrates that while alcoholism is a contributing factor to some domestic violence, it is not the cause. International studies attribute domestic violence to other underlying factors in the abuser's life. Some of these factors include violence in the home as a child, a belief that violence against women is acceptable and a desire for personal power. In discussing substance abuse and domestic violence, these researchers conclude that one does not cause the other. Because they are not causally related, scholars recommend that the government address alcoholism and domestic violence as two separate problems with two separate treatments. "Although programs addressing alcohol abuse are no doubt beneficial in many ways . . . unless interventions also aim to . . . alter male attitudes and beliefs in the rightness of male dominance and control over women, they are unlikely to be successful." From Holly Johnson, Contrasting Views of the Role of Alcohol in Cases of Wife Assault, 16 J. Interpersonal Violence 54, 57 (2001); Larry W. Bennett, Substance Abuse and Woman Abuse by Male Partners (1997).
Economic hardship places additional stress on family relationships and affects a woman's ability to leave a violent relationship. In many countries in CEE/FSU, affordable housing is very limited. Many women do not seek legal relief against their abusive husbands and partners because they do not have alternative housing arrangements. This reality affects both divorced women, who must live with their ex-husbands while they wait for financial and property settlements, as well as married women who may wish to flee the abuse but have no reasonable alternatives given their lack of economic resources. Economic considerations may be even more pressing for women with children.
Another consequence of poverty is changing gender roles within the family. Where there is severe poverty and unemployment, women often seek informal employment, taking jobs that men are unwilling to do. The income generated from this work, along with high rates of male unemployment, result in a shift of traditional gender roles in the family. This shift in gender roles changes the power structure within the family, often resulting in increased violence.
Religion also plays an increasingly important role in many countries in CEE/FSU. The religions are also diverse, ranging from Catholicism in Poland and Eastern Orthodox Christianity in Ukraine to Islam in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Some leaders in these religious communities hold very traditional views, taking the position that a woman should remain in her marriage and endure physical abuse regardless of the circumstances.
Stereotypes about the "proper" roles and responsibilities of men and women in the family reinforce the view that the family is a self-contained unit, deserving privacy at the expense of other rights and freedoms. Traditionally, women are relegated to subordinate positions in this family structure. The Network Women's Program explains that in CEE/FSU:
Such attitudes endure in countries and communities that condone violence against women as a part of daily life. In some places, the goal of the community is "to save the family." Women are told: "Go back to your husbands. Do you want to make your children orphans?" In many cases, society teaches women that they are at least partly responsible for provoking the violence against them. "Good wives" seldom get beaten. And when they do, its excused as a sign of affection. As a Russian proverb puts it, "No beatings means there's no love."
From Network Women's Program, Bending the Bow: Targeting Women's Human Rights and Opportunities, Open Society Institute 24 (2002).
For victims of domestic violence, this notion of family privacy often interferes with effective police intervention and prosecutorial decisions in domestic violence cases. In many countries, people interviewed, including many police officers, reported that police often regard domestic violence as a minor offense and as a family issue in which police officers should not interfere.
These stereotypes also reinforce the mentality that men are the leaders of the family and thus have the right to control women's behavior by any means necessary. Women are expected to show their husbands obedience and respect. Women have identified the male view of women as subordinate to men as one of the underlying causes of violence against women. Many view violence as a normal part of an intimate relationship.
Research also indicates that many people accept the widespread myth that alcohol is the primary cause of domestic violence. Police, prosecutors, doctors, and others share this view that alcoholism causes domestic violence.
Research from around the world demonstrates that while alcoholism is a contributing factor to some domestic violence, it is not the cause. International studies attribute domestic violence to other underlying factors in the abuser's life. Some of these factors include violence in the home as a child, a belief that violence against women is acceptable and a desire for personal power. In discussing substance abuse and domestic violence, these researchers conclude that one does not cause the other. Because they are not causally related, scholars recommend that the government address alcoholism and domestic violence as two separate problems with two separate treatments. "Although programs addressing alcohol abuse are no doubt beneficial in many ways . . . unless interventions also aim to . . . alter male attitudes and beliefs in the rightness of male dominance and control over women, they are unlikely to be successful." From Holly Johnson, Contrasting Views of the Role of Alcohol in Cases of Wife Assault, 16 J. Interpersonal Violence 54, 57 (2001); Larry W. Bennett, Substance Abuse and Woman Abuse by Male Partners (1997).
Economic hardship places additional stress on family relationships and affects a woman's ability to leave a violent relationship. In many countries in CEE/FSU, affordable housing is very limited. Many women do not seek legal relief against their abusive husbands and partners because they do not have alternative housing arrangements. This reality affects both divorced women, who must live with their ex-husbands while they wait for financial and property settlements, as well as married women who may wish to flee the abuse but have no reasonable alternatives given their lack of economic resources. Economic considerations may be even more pressing for women with children.
Another consequence of poverty is changing gender roles within the family. Where there is severe poverty and unemployment, women often seek informal employment, taking jobs that men are unwilling to do. The income generated from this work, along with high rates of male unemployment, result in a shift of traditional gender roles in the family. This shift in gender roles changes the power structure within the family, often resulting in increased violence.
Religion also plays an increasingly important role in many countries in CEE/FSU. The religions are also diverse, ranging from Catholicism in Poland and Eastern Orthodox Christianity in Ukraine to Islam in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Some leaders in these religious communities hold very traditional views, taking the position that a woman should remain in her marriage and endure physical abuse regardless of the circumstances.
Monday 1 June 2009
EVOLUTION OF THEORIES OF VIOLENCE
Gregg Barak : February 1,2006
A common understanding of the causes of domestic violence can help communities develop more effective responses to the violence; such an understanding helps avoid conflicting responses that could undermine efforts to protect victims and hold batterers accountable.
When the battered women's movement in the United States began in the early 1970s, the prevailing theory of why men batter was based on psychopathology. According to this theory, men who abused their wives were mentally ill and could be cured through medication or psychiatric treatment. Researchers found, however, that the behavior of perpetrators of domestic violence did not correspond to profiles of individuals who were mentally ill. Batterers attack only their intimate partners. People who suffer from mental illnesses such as schizophrenia do not limit their violence to their intimate partners.
Initial studies also characterized battered women as mentally ill. The results of these first studies, however, were distorted because the studies examined women who were in mental hospitals; their batterers, who were calm and credible in contrast to their wives, were asked about the cause of their partners' condition and thus given an opportunity to minimize and deny their partners' account of the abuse. In reality, however, battered women are not mentally ill, and many of those who were institutionalized were misdiagnosed because of a failure to recognize or understand the physical and psychological effects of domestic violence. From Joan Zorza, Batterer Manipulation and Retaliation in the Courts: A Largely Unrecognized Phenomenon Sometimes Encouraged by Court Practices, Violence Against Women 47-48 (Joan Zorza ed., 2002).
Researchers next theorized that violence was learned. They argued that men battered because they had learned violence in their families as children, and women sought out abusive men because they saw their mothers being abused. This was the "learned behavior" theory of violence. Yet women who witness domestic violence are not any more likely to be battered as adults. (A recent study reported by the Family Violence Prevention Fund does indicate, however, that women who were physically or sexually abused as children may be more likely to be abused as adults.)
Although research does show that boys who witness abuse in the home are seven times more likely to batter, many men who witnessed violence as children vow not to use violence and do not grow up to be batterers. A more consistent explanation for the relationship between witnessing and battering is that witnessing is one of many sources of information; men also receive information from the larger society that it is appropriate to control your wife and to enforce this control through violence. Further, as emphasized in batterers' intervention programs, boys who witnessed domestic violence and grew up to be batterers learned more than just violence; rather, they learned—and thus can unlearn—lessons about the respective roles of men and women that contribute to their abusive behavior as adults.
Closely related to the "learned behavior" theory were the theories that described violence as the result of a loss of control. For example, many believed that men are abusive when they drink because the alcohol causes them to lose control. Others explained men's violence as a result of an inability to control their anger and frustration. These theorists argued that gendered societal expectations prevented men from expressing anger and frustration; these feelings would build up until the man lost control and released his feelings through the use of violence.
This "loss of control" theory is contradicted by batterers' behavior. Batterers' violence is carefully targeted to certain people at certain times and places. For example, batterers "choose not to hit their bosses or police officers, no matter how angry or 'out of control' they are." From Ethel Klein et al., Ending Domestic Violence: Changing Public Perceptions/Halting the Epidemic 6 (1997).
Abusers also follow their own "internal rules and regulations about abusive behaviors." They often choose to abuse their partners only in private, or may take steps to ensure that they do not leave visible evidence of the abuse. Batterers also chose their tactics carefully—some destroy property, some rely on threats of abuse, and some threaten children. Through these decisions, "perpetrators are making choices about what they will or will not do to the victim, even when they are claiming they 'lost it' or were 'out of control.' Such decision-making indicates that they are actually in control of their abusive behaviors." From Anne L. Ganley & Susan Schechter, Domestic Violence: A National Curriculum for Family Preservation Practitioners 19 (1995). In fact, a recent study reported by the Family Violence Prevention Fund indicates that many batterers become more controlled and calm as their aggressiveness increases.
Another theory that was advanced was the "learned helplessness" theory. Lenore Walker, a psychologist in the United States, studied the behavior of women who stay in violent relationships. Walker hypothesized that women stay in abusive relationships because constant abuse strips them of the will to leave.
The learned helplessness theory, however, did not account for the fact that there are many social, economic and cultural reasons a woman might chose to stay in an abusive relationship. Women often have very rational reasons for staying—they may fear retaliation against themselves or their children, or they may not be able to financially support themselves or their children. They may be ostracized by their family and community if they leave.
Further, the learned helplessness theory is inconsistent with the fact that women surviving in abusive relationships attempt to leave many times and routinely act in very conscious ways to try to minimize the abuse directed at them and to protect their children. As Dobash and Dobash explain, "[w]omen are usually persistent and often tenacious in their attempts to seek help, but pursue such help through channels that prove to be most useful and reject those that have been found to be unhelpful or condemning." Battered women do not live their lives in a state of "learned helplessness." On the contrary, they often engage in a process of "staying, leaving and returning." During this process,
women make active and conscious decisions based on their changing circumstances: they leave for short periods in order to escape the violence and to emphasize their disaffection in the hope that this will stop the violence. In the beginning, they are generally not attempting to end the relationship, but are negotiating to reestablish the relationship on a non-violent basis.
In addition, the learned helplessness theory was based on perceived characteristics ostensibly shared by battered women, such as low self esteem, a tendency to withdraw, or perceptions of loss of control. Those who espoused the theory, however, rarely took into account the fact that these "characteristics" might be, in fact, the physical and psychological effects of the abuse.
Finally, the static model of "learned helplessness" is contradicted by the fact that the violence, and the woman's reaction to the violence, often changes over time. The first episode of violence is generally minor; victims may be surprised and shocked, and may not anticipate that it will occur again. Rather, as Dobash and Dobash explain, "they believe, as anyone might, in the potential for reform and are still committed to the relationship." Victims may begin to then
look to their own actions for an explanation. This is not surprising in societies which allocate to wives the responsibility for happy husbands and families; women are expected to ask how their behavior 'caused' their husband's violence. Women eventually realize that solutions to the man's violence do not reside in a change of their own behavior. For some this realization comes fairly quickly while others take longer to overcome such culturally constructed notions.
The "learned helplessness" theory was accompanied by a resurgence of the psychopathology; theorists argued that women stayed in abusive relationships because they suffered from a personality disorder that caused them to seek out abusive relationships as a means of self-punishment, or were addicted to abusive relationships. Many also maintained that women were co-alcoholics with their spouses and thus could be "treated" through alcohol addiction programs. These theories were inconsistent with the fact that women had very rational reasons for staying in relationships. In addition, while battered women may be subject to an increased risk of substance abuse, this is a consequence, not a cause, of the abuse.
The "cycle of violence" was the next theory to gain popularity in the United States. This theory was based on the belief that men did not express their frustration and anger because they had been taught not to show their feelings. The man's tension built until he exploded and became violent. The tension was released, and the couple enjoyed a "honeymoon" period, during which the husband was apologetic and remorseful.
This theory, however, was not consistent with women's experiences. Many women never experienced a honeymoon period. Others stated that there was no gradual build-up of tension, but rather unpredictable, almost random, episodes of battering. This theory also did not explain why men directed their explosions of rage only against their intimate partners. Dobash and Dobash explain that
the conception of a cycle of violence is static rather than dynamic and changing, does not deal with intentionality, and the notion of the third phase as a 'honeymoon' phase belies the experience of women who indicate that even the process of 'making-up' or reconstructing the relationship is carried out against the background of a personal history of violence and coercion and in the context of few viable alternatives to the violent relationship.
From R. Emerson Dobash & Russel P. Dobash, Women, Violence and Social Change 222-23, 225, 229-32 (1992).
This theory was often paired with the "family/relationship conflict" model. According to this model, "both the man and the woman contribute to violence in an intimate relationship." This model assumes either that the relationship is characterized by mutual violence, or that "in many cases a wife provokes her husband by 'below-the-belt' arguments prompting a violence response from her husband." The woman's behavior contributes to the build-up of tension in the man, until the man explodes in a violent rage, followed by a honeymoon period.
Theories based on "mutual" violence do not take into account the different ways that men and women use violence in intimate relationships. Further, any theory that describes violence as a response to "provocation" from the other partner is simply another form of victim blaming. Nor does this model account for instances in which a husband explodes over trivial issues or starts beating his wife while she is asleep.
From Michael Paymar, Building a Coordinated Community Response to Domestic Violence: An Overview of the Problem 3-4 (1994).
What was missing from all of these theories was a recognition of batterers' intent to gain control over their partners' actions, thoughts and feelings. The current understanding of abuse, represented by the "Power and Control Wheel," evolved out of many discussions with battered women and batterers through the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project (DAIP) in Duluth. The Power and Control Wheel describes the different tactics an abuser uses to maintain power and control over his partner.
In an abusive relationships, the batterer uses the pattern of tactics described in the Power and Control Wheel to reinforce his use of physical violence. Violent incidents are not isolated instances of a loss of control, or even cyclical expressions of anger and frustration. Rather, each instance is part of a larger pattern of behavior designed to exert and maintain power and control over the victim.
The Power and Control Wheel is based on the assumption that the purpose of the violence is to exert power and control over another. The elements that formed the basis of earlier theories—a boy witnessing abuse as a child, or substance abuse—may be contributing factors, but are not the "cause" of the violence. Rather, the batterer consciously uses these tactics to ensure the submissiveness of his partner. As Schecter and Ganley explain, perpetrators of domestic violence
bring into their intimate relationships certain expectations of who is in charge and what the acceptable mechanisms are for enforcing that dominance. Those attitudes and beliefs, rather than the victim's behavior, determine whether or not perpetrators are domestically violent.
From Schechter & Ganley, Domestic Violence: A National Curriculum for Family Preservation Practitioners 19 (1995). The exercise of male violence, through which women's subordinate role and unequal power are enforced and maintained, is, in turn, tolerated and reinforced by political and cultural institutions and economic arrangements.
Over time, however, DAIP began to realize that even this theory—that batterers use violence to gain control and power—did not sufficiently capture the phenomenon of violence. While the Power and Control Wheel (i.e., coercive behaviors that establish power and control) did describe women's experiences, batterers in batterers' intervention programs did not articulate a desire for power and control when they talked about their use of these behaviors. Consequently, DAIP began to conceptualize violence within the larger context of society. Under this theory, violence is
a logical outcome of relationships of dominance and inequality—relationships shaped not simply by the personal choices or desires of some men to [dominate] their wives but by how we, as a society, construct social and economic relationships between men and women and within marriage (or intimate domestic relationships) and families. Our task is to understand how our response to violence creates a climate of intolerance or acceptance to the force used in intimate relationships.
A common understanding of the causes of domestic violence can help communities develop more effective responses to the violence; such an understanding helps avoid conflicting responses that could undermine efforts to protect victims and hold batterers accountable.
When the battered women's movement in the United States began in the early 1970s, the prevailing theory of why men batter was based on psychopathology. According to this theory, men who abused their wives were mentally ill and could be cured through medication or psychiatric treatment. Researchers found, however, that the behavior of perpetrators of domestic violence did not correspond to profiles of individuals who were mentally ill. Batterers attack only their intimate partners. People who suffer from mental illnesses such as schizophrenia do not limit their violence to their intimate partners.
Initial studies also characterized battered women as mentally ill. The results of these first studies, however, were distorted because the studies examined women who were in mental hospitals; their batterers, who were calm and credible in contrast to their wives, were asked about the cause of their partners' condition and thus given an opportunity to minimize and deny their partners' account of the abuse. In reality, however, battered women are not mentally ill, and many of those who were institutionalized were misdiagnosed because of a failure to recognize or understand the physical and psychological effects of domestic violence. From Joan Zorza, Batterer Manipulation and Retaliation in the Courts: A Largely Unrecognized Phenomenon Sometimes Encouraged by Court Practices, Violence Against Women 47-48 (Joan Zorza ed., 2002).
Researchers next theorized that violence was learned. They argued that men battered because they had learned violence in their families as children, and women sought out abusive men because they saw their mothers being abused. This was the "learned behavior" theory of violence. Yet women who witness domestic violence are not any more likely to be battered as adults. (A recent study reported by the Family Violence Prevention Fund does indicate, however, that women who were physically or sexually abused as children may be more likely to be abused as adults.)
Although research does show that boys who witness abuse in the home are seven times more likely to batter, many men who witnessed violence as children vow not to use violence and do not grow up to be batterers. A more consistent explanation for the relationship between witnessing and battering is that witnessing is one of many sources of information; men also receive information from the larger society that it is appropriate to control your wife and to enforce this control through violence. Further, as emphasized in batterers' intervention programs, boys who witnessed domestic violence and grew up to be batterers learned more than just violence; rather, they learned—and thus can unlearn—lessons about the respective roles of men and women that contribute to their abusive behavior as adults.
Closely related to the "learned behavior" theory were the theories that described violence as the result of a loss of control. For example, many believed that men are abusive when they drink because the alcohol causes them to lose control. Others explained men's violence as a result of an inability to control their anger and frustration. These theorists argued that gendered societal expectations prevented men from expressing anger and frustration; these feelings would build up until the man lost control and released his feelings through the use of violence.
This "loss of control" theory is contradicted by batterers' behavior. Batterers' violence is carefully targeted to certain people at certain times and places. For example, batterers "choose not to hit their bosses or police officers, no matter how angry or 'out of control' they are." From Ethel Klein et al., Ending Domestic Violence: Changing Public Perceptions/Halting the Epidemic 6 (1997).
Abusers also follow their own "internal rules and regulations about abusive behaviors." They often choose to abuse their partners only in private, or may take steps to ensure that they do not leave visible evidence of the abuse. Batterers also chose their tactics carefully—some destroy property, some rely on threats of abuse, and some threaten children. Through these decisions, "perpetrators are making choices about what they will or will not do to the victim, even when they are claiming they 'lost it' or were 'out of control.' Such decision-making indicates that they are actually in control of their abusive behaviors." From Anne L. Ganley & Susan Schechter, Domestic Violence: A National Curriculum for Family Preservation Practitioners 19 (1995). In fact, a recent study reported by the Family Violence Prevention Fund indicates that many batterers become more controlled and calm as their aggressiveness increases.
Another theory that was advanced was the "learned helplessness" theory. Lenore Walker, a psychologist in the United States, studied the behavior of women who stay in violent relationships. Walker hypothesized that women stay in abusive relationships because constant abuse strips them of the will to leave.
The learned helplessness theory, however, did not account for the fact that there are many social, economic and cultural reasons a woman might chose to stay in an abusive relationship. Women often have very rational reasons for staying—they may fear retaliation against themselves or their children, or they may not be able to financially support themselves or their children. They may be ostracized by their family and community if they leave.
Further, the learned helplessness theory is inconsistent with the fact that women surviving in abusive relationships attempt to leave many times and routinely act in very conscious ways to try to minimize the abuse directed at them and to protect their children. As Dobash and Dobash explain, "[w]omen are usually persistent and often tenacious in their attempts to seek help, but pursue such help through channels that prove to be most useful and reject those that have been found to be unhelpful or condemning." Battered women do not live their lives in a state of "learned helplessness." On the contrary, they often engage in a process of "staying, leaving and returning." During this process,
women make active and conscious decisions based on their changing circumstances: they leave for short periods in order to escape the violence and to emphasize their disaffection in the hope that this will stop the violence. In the beginning, they are generally not attempting to end the relationship, but are negotiating to reestablish the relationship on a non-violent basis.
In addition, the learned helplessness theory was based on perceived characteristics ostensibly shared by battered women, such as low self esteem, a tendency to withdraw, or perceptions of loss of control. Those who espoused the theory, however, rarely took into account the fact that these "characteristics" might be, in fact, the physical and psychological effects of the abuse.
Finally, the static model of "learned helplessness" is contradicted by the fact that the violence, and the woman's reaction to the violence, often changes over time. The first episode of violence is generally minor; victims may be surprised and shocked, and may not anticipate that it will occur again. Rather, as Dobash and Dobash explain, "they believe, as anyone might, in the potential for reform and are still committed to the relationship." Victims may begin to then
look to their own actions for an explanation. This is not surprising in societies which allocate to wives the responsibility for happy husbands and families; women are expected to ask how their behavior 'caused' their husband's violence. Women eventually realize that solutions to the man's violence do not reside in a change of their own behavior. For some this realization comes fairly quickly while others take longer to overcome such culturally constructed notions.
The "learned helplessness" theory was accompanied by a resurgence of the psychopathology; theorists argued that women stayed in abusive relationships because they suffered from a personality disorder that caused them to seek out abusive relationships as a means of self-punishment, or were addicted to abusive relationships. Many also maintained that women were co-alcoholics with their spouses and thus could be "treated" through alcohol addiction programs. These theories were inconsistent with the fact that women had very rational reasons for staying in relationships. In addition, while battered women may be subject to an increased risk of substance abuse, this is a consequence, not a cause, of the abuse.
The "cycle of violence" was the next theory to gain popularity in the United States. This theory was based on the belief that men did not express their frustration and anger because they had been taught not to show their feelings. The man's tension built until he exploded and became violent. The tension was released, and the couple enjoyed a "honeymoon" period, during which the husband was apologetic and remorseful.
This theory, however, was not consistent with women's experiences. Many women never experienced a honeymoon period. Others stated that there was no gradual build-up of tension, but rather unpredictable, almost random, episodes of battering. This theory also did not explain why men directed their explosions of rage only against their intimate partners. Dobash and Dobash explain that
the conception of a cycle of violence is static rather than dynamic and changing, does not deal with intentionality, and the notion of the third phase as a 'honeymoon' phase belies the experience of women who indicate that even the process of 'making-up' or reconstructing the relationship is carried out against the background of a personal history of violence and coercion and in the context of few viable alternatives to the violent relationship.
From R. Emerson Dobash & Russel P. Dobash, Women, Violence and Social Change 222-23, 225, 229-32 (1992).
This theory was often paired with the "family/relationship conflict" model. According to this model, "both the man and the woman contribute to violence in an intimate relationship." This model assumes either that the relationship is characterized by mutual violence, or that "in many cases a wife provokes her husband by 'below-the-belt' arguments prompting a violence response from her husband." The woman's behavior contributes to the build-up of tension in the man, until the man explodes in a violent rage, followed by a honeymoon period.
Theories based on "mutual" violence do not take into account the different ways that men and women use violence in intimate relationships. Further, any theory that describes violence as a response to "provocation" from the other partner is simply another form of victim blaming. Nor does this model account for instances in which a husband explodes over trivial issues or starts beating his wife while she is asleep.
From Michael Paymar, Building a Coordinated Community Response to Domestic Violence: An Overview of the Problem 3-4 (1994).
What was missing from all of these theories was a recognition of batterers' intent to gain control over their partners' actions, thoughts and feelings. The current understanding of abuse, represented by the "Power and Control Wheel," evolved out of many discussions with battered women and batterers through the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project (DAIP) in Duluth. The Power and Control Wheel describes the different tactics an abuser uses to maintain power and control over his partner.
In an abusive relationships, the batterer uses the pattern of tactics described in the Power and Control Wheel to reinforce his use of physical violence. Violent incidents are not isolated instances of a loss of control, or even cyclical expressions of anger and frustration. Rather, each instance is part of a larger pattern of behavior designed to exert and maintain power and control over the victim.
The Power and Control Wheel is based on the assumption that the purpose of the violence is to exert power and control over another. The elements that formed the basis of earlier theories—a boy witnessing abuse as a child, or substance abuse—may be contributing factors, but are not the "cause" of the violence. Rather, the batterer consciously uses these tactics to ensure the submissiveness of his partner. As Schecter and Ganley explain, perpetrators of domestic violence
bring into their intimate relationships certain expectations of who is in charge and what the acceptable mechanisms are for enforcing that dominance. Those attitudes and beliefs, rather than the victim's behavior, determine whether or not perpetrators are domestically violent.
From Schechter & Ganley, Domestic Violence: A National Curriculum for Family Preservation Practitioners 19 (1995). The exercise of male violence, through which women's subordinate role and unequal power are enforced and maintained, is, in turn, tolerated and reinforced by political and cultural institutions and economic arrangements.
Over time, however, DAIP began to realize that even this theory—that batterers use violence to gain control and power—did not sufficiently capture the phenomenon of violence. While the Power and Control Wheel (i.e., coercive behaviors that establish power and control) did describe women's experiences, batterers in batterers' intervention programs did not articulate a desire for power and control when they talked about their use of these behaviors. Consequently, DAIP began to conceptualize violence within the larger context of society. Under this theory, violence is
a logical outcome of relationships of dominance and inequality—relationships shaped not simply by the personal choices or desires of some men to [dominate] their wives but by how we, as a society, construct social and economic relationships between men and women and within marriage (or intimate domestic relationships) and families. Our task is to understand how our response to violence creates a climate of intolerance or acceptance to the force used in intimate relationships.
CRIMINOLOGIST GREGG BARAK
He is a Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Eastern Michigan University and the former Visiting Distinguished Professor in the College of Justice & Safety at Eastern Kentucky University. In 2003 He became the 27th Fellow of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences and in 2007 He received the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Critical Division of the American Society of Criminology.
He is the author and/or editor of 16 books on crime, justice, media, violence, criminal law, homelessness, human rights, and related topics. To read about my latest books, Criminology: An Integrated Approach (2009) and Violence, Conflict, and World Order (2007), scroll down the menu and click on these titles. To watch a video of my "Mediated Violence" talk as part of the EKU Distinguished Lecture Series in 2003-04, go to YouTube and enter hisname.
The purpose of this web site is to disseminate ideas that might decrease crime and increase justice.
As a "public service," you can visit this web site twenty-four hours and seven days a week to receive breaking news on crime and punishment from around the world. Simply click on Headlines/Links near the bottom of the menu.
On this site, he is posting a sampling of essays and articles of mine that will change periodically. For the most recent posted guest essay and in this case an overview of my work and vision as a criminologist, click on What's New: Klepac on Barak. You may also, if interested, read about and/or purchase most of my books and anthologies from this website.
If interested, He is available for public and/or private speaking engagements on numerous crime, media, violence, and justice topics. Of late He has given sponsored lectures outside the USA, in such countries as Canada, Finland, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Inside the country, before the National Institute of Justice in Washington, D.C. and in such cities as San Diego, California, Rockford, Illinois and La Cross, Wisconsin.
He may also be retained for evaluations of the juvenile and adult criminal justice systems, or on domestic violence and sexual victimization projects. He has worked in such capacities for the Office of Justice Planning and Evaluation in Portland, Oregon; the Youth Commission of the City of Aurora, Illinois; and for the Attorney General's Office in Montgomery, Alabama.
Next time, you can read his articels in my blogs
He is the author and/or editor of 16 books on crime, justice, media, violence, criminal law, homelessness, human rights, and related topics. To read about my latest books, Criminology: An Integrated Approach (2009) and Violence, Conflict, and World Order (2007), scroll down the menu and click on these titles. To watch a video of my "Mediated Violence" talk as part of the EKU Distinguished Lecture Series in 2003-04, go to YouTube and enter hisname.
The purpose of this web site is to disseminate ideas that might decrease crime and increase justice.
As a "public service," you can visit this web site twenty-four hours and seven days a week to receive breaking news on crime and punishment from around the world. Simply click on Headlines/Links near the bottom of the menu.
On this site, he is posting a sampling of essays and articles of mine that will change periodically. For the most recent posted guest essay and in this case an overview of my work and vision as a criminologist, click on What's New: Klepac on Barak. You may also, if interested, read about and/or purchase most of my books and anthologies from this website.
If interested, He is available for public and/or private speaking engagements on numerous crime, media, violence, and justice topics. Of late He has given sponsored lectures outside the USA, in such countries as Canada, Finland, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Inside the country, before the National Institute of Justice in Washington, D.C. and in such cities as San Diego, California, Rockford, Illinois and La Cross, Wisconsin.
He may also be retained for evaluations of the juvenile and adult criminal justice systems, or on domestic violence and sexual victimization projects. He has worked in such capacities for the Office of Justice Planning and Evaluation in Portland, Oregon; the Youth Commission of the City of Aurora, Illinois; and for the Attorney General's Office in Montgomery, Alabama.
Next time, you can read his articels in my blogs
Sunday 24 May 2009
STRESS AND WORKING IN PRISONS
My friends, Aisha was a information officer at departemen of Information, with eleven years'experience. She was moved to prison. She always faces prisoners with violence and she saw her friends has an aggresive behaviour, she felt uncomfortable. The case of Aisha show that prisons is a stressful place to work.
The Effect of Stress
The effect of stress have an influence on many areas of our lives. Stress can lead to physical an psychological illness, problems work, disturbence in our families and social lives, addition, and perhaps even criminal behaviour (David J. Cooke, Pamela J. Baldwin, and Jacqueline Howison, Psychology in Prisons, 1990):
1. Psychological Disturbence
The scientific evidence shows that stressful experiences lead to psychological disturbence, stressful experiences have been shown to cause anxiety, depression, mental illness, and suicidal behaviour. Depression and anxiety are the most common effects. When some one is depressed, will experience sadness, tearfulness, irritability, concern about him or herself, the world and the future. That person may have suicidal ideas, their sleep may be disturbed, their weight may drop and concentration may be poor. People who are anxious may experience considerable physical tension. Their sleep may disturbed, worry, and concentration may be disturbed.
2. Physical Illness and Disturbence
There is also evidence shows that stressful experiences can lead to both minor and major physical disturbence. At minor level : stress may lead to fatigue, headaches, impaired cencentration, sleep disturbence, indigestion.Stress may also lead to more serious and profound physical problems : skin problems, high blood pressure, coronary heart disease to sexual difficulties, peptic ulcers, and inflammation of the appendix.
3. Family and Social Disturbence
Stressful experiences can lead, either directly or indirectly, to significant family and social problems. Stress can lead to longstanding marital conflicts, also stop going to his social clubs or going to see friends.
4. Addiction
Stress may lead to addiction. By addiction is menat an over - dependence on food, alcohol, drugs or nicotine, because they feel better if they eat, drink, smoke or use drugs. If such activities continue for along time , it possible addictes to these substances. The addictions result in their own health and social problems.
5. Criminal Behaviour
Stressful experiences may lead people to commit certain forms of criminal acts, example : the case of shop lifting or some cases.
6. Difficulties at Work
Stress in the home and stress in the work - place can lead to difficulties at work. Three major types of problem emerged at work :
- 1. aften absent from work for short periodes;
-2. failled to carry aout the walfare duties;
-3. less able to cope quickly when difficult situations developed.(These evidences in a study of prison officers in New Jersey)
Why are Prison Stressful Placess ?If we aks some prison officers they will talk that they do not suffer from stress but all their work - mates do. The Americans call this the "Jhon Wayne Syndrome". The evidence of mortality statistics show that prison officers have a higher risk of heart disease than the general population, because habits of smoking, drinking or overagting. The rate of minor psychological problems seems to be high in the officers. There are probably three reasons:
1. Nature of The Job :
- deal with difficult and disturbed individuals whose behaviour is, at times, unpredictable.- must be vigilant
- and more general level the lack of stimulation or chanllenge ini many prison officers' job canbe distressing.
2. Role in The Organisation
Stress exist in prison because :
- there is poor communication from above. Orders, polcies, and procedures are changed butthese changes are not communicated.
- the majority of prison officers have little impact on polices : the lack of involvement indecision - making can be highly stressful.
- a final aspect of the prison officers' job is the ambiguity of the job : concern for security andconcern for the walfare of prisons.
3. Prisons and The Outside World
- Society can have a negative view of the prison officer.
- Friends and neighbours often do not appreciate the difficulties of the job.
- A futher difficulty may be the fear of physical abuse by ex-prisoners on the officer or hisfamily.These are soem of the factors which make prisons stressful places to work in.
The Effect of Stress
The effect of stress have an influence on many areas of our lives. Stress can lead to physical an psychological illness, problems work, disturbence in our families and social lives, addition, and perhaps even criminal behaviour (David J. Cooke, Pamela J. Baldwin, and Jacqueline Howison, Psychology in Prisons, 1990):
1. Psychological Disturbence
The scientific evidence shows that stressful experiences lead to psychological disturbence, stressful experiences have been shown to cause anxiety, depression, mental illness, and suicidal behaviour. Depression and anxiety are the most common effects. When some one is depressed, will experience sadness, tearfulness, irritability, concern about him or herself, the world and the future. That person may have suicidal ideas, their sleep may be disturbed, their weight may drop and concentration may be poor. People who are anxious may experience considerable physical tension. Their sleep may disturbed, worry, and concentration may be disturbed.
2. Physical Illness and Disturbence
There is also evidence shows that stressful experiences can lead to both minor and major physical disturbence. At minor level : stress may lead to fatigue, headaches, impaired cencentration, sleep disturbence, indigestion.Stress may also lead to more serious and profound physical problems : skin problems, high blood pressure, coronary heart disease to sexual difficulties, peptic ulcers, and inflammation of the appendix.
3. Family and Social Disturbence
Stressful experiences can lead, either directly or indirectly, to significant family and social problems. Stress can lead to longstanding marital conflicts, also stop going to his social clubs or going to see friends.
4. Addiction
Stress may lead to addiction. By addiction is menat an over - dependence on food, alcohol, drugs or nicotine, because they feel better if they eat, drink, smoke or use drugs. If such activities continue for along time , it possible addictes to these substances. The addictions result in their own health and social problems.
5. Criminal Behaviour
Stressful experiences may lead people to commit certain forms of criminal acts, example : the case of shop lifting or some cases.
6. Difficulties at Work
Stress in the home and stress in the work - place can lead to difficulties at work. Three major types of problem emerged at work :
- 1. aften absent from work for short periodes;
-2. failled to carry aout the walfare duties;
-3. less able to cope quickly when difficult situations developed.(These evidences in a study of prison officers in New Jersey)
Why are Prison Stressful Placess ?If we aks some prison officers they will talk that they do not suffer from stress but all their work - mates do. The Americans call this the "Jhon Wayne Syndrome". The evidence of mortality statistics show that prison officers have a higher risk of heart disease than the general population, because habits of smoking, drinking or overagting. The rate of minor psychological problems seems to be high in the officers. There are probably three reasons:
1. Nature of The Job :
- deal with difficult and disturbed individuals whose behaviour is, at times, unpredictable.- must be vigilant
- and more general level the lack of stimulation or chanllenge ini many prison officers' job canbe distressing.
2. Role in The Organisation
Stress exist in prison because :
- there is poor communication from above. Orders, polcies, and procedures are changed butthese changes are not communicated.
- the majority of prison officers have little impact on polices : the lack of involvement indecision - making can be highly stressful.
- a final aspect of the prison officers' job is the ambiguity of the job : concern for security andconcern for the walfare of prisons.
3. Prisons and The Outside World
- Society can have a negative view of the prison officer.
- Friends and neighbours often do not appreciate the difficulties of the job.
- A futher difficulty may be the fear of physical abuse by ex-prisoners on the officer or hisfamily.These are soem of the factors which make prisons stressful places to work in.
COPING WITH DISTURBED PRISONERS
I wrote the psychological effects of being in a prison which prison officers felt psychological disturbance. Now, what can we do to help the disturbed prisoners ? In my articel section i will look at the most common forms of psychological disturbance in prison.
Anxiety
Anxiety is a response to some kind of stress. Stress may cause : bullying, worry over afuture decision about parole, movement to anather institution or involvement in illegal activities.Common symptoms of anxiety :headsaches migrainedizzines blurred visionblushing tremblingtwitching muscle spasmsdifficulty in breathing difficulty in swallowingaching muscles in neck, back,or legs heart palpitationsheart skipping beat thumping shest painsstomach shurning felling sickindigestion butterflies in stomachtiredness weak knees'jelly' legs sweatingfeeling the need to pas water frequently
So you can see from the list symptoms are very varied an could be caused by physical illnesses. If someone is found to be anxious like this, what can you do ? You do the following advice :
1. Breathe slowly and evenly.
2. Sit down if possible and gradually let go of physical tension in :a. shoulders (full them and back and then let go)b. chest (take a deep breath and let it out slowly)c. stomach (clench the stomach muscles to make them hard and ten let go)d. legs ( stretch them out and then let them flop)e. arms (bend your arms at the elbow, pulling your hands up to your shoulders andthen go again)f. hands ( stretch out the five fingers and then let them relax)
3. Keep breathing slowly and evenly. Reassure the prisoner that they will be all right.
DepressionPrison officers need to be alert to the tell-tale signs of depression so that they can send the prisoners for a thorough medical or psycological examination. The depression signs :- feeling miscrable-feeling listless or lacking in energy-lack of interest in usual activities'being irritable-sleeping poorly-losing interest in food-losing weight-feeling guilty over things that are not particully important-feeling useless-feeling hopeless about things-thinking that things will never get any better-saying that there is no point in carrying on-talking about to die
Prison officers can help :
1. Listen carefully. try to show that you are interested in the prisoner's difficulty and that youare sympathetic.
2. Try to give hope to prisoners. Suggest ways in which things might be improved. Do notpromise anything that you can not be sure of, but try to think of ways in which the situationcould be helped.
3.If there are pratical problems that can be solved.
4. Encourage the prisoner to keep up their activities.
5. Do not tell the prisoner just to snap out of it, or that they are stupid to worry or getdepressed over the way things are. You may think that prisoner is miserable unnecessarily.
Suicide attemps
Suicide attemps are complicated issues.The suggestions of handling it :
1. Show understanding (use listening skills)
2. Try to give hope that there will be a solution
3. Think of any practical suggestions that might hepl.
4. Keep the prisoner in contact with staff or other prisoners.
5.Keep the prisoner occupied.
Anxiety
Anxiety is a response to some kind of stress. Stress may cause : bullying, worry over afuture decision about parole, movement to anather institution or involvement in illegal activities.Common symptoms of anxiety :headsaches migrainedizzines blurred visionblushing tremblingtwitching muscle spasmsdifficulty in breathing difficulty in swallowingaching muscles in neck, back,or legs heart palpitationsheart skipping beat thumping shest painsstomach shurning felling sickindigestion butterflies in stomachtiredness weak knees'jelly' legs sweatingfeeling the need to pas water frequently
So you can see from the list symptoms are very varied an could be caused by physical illnesses. If someone is found to be anxious like this, what can you do ? You do the following advice :
1. Breathe slowly and evenly.
2. Sit down if possible and gradually let go of physical tension in :a. shoulders (full them and back and then let go)b. chest (take a deep breath and let it out slowly)c. stomach (clench the stomach muscles to make them hard and ten let go)d. legs ( stretch them out and then let them flop)e. arms (bend your arms at the elbow, pulling your hands up to your shoulders andthen go again)f. hands ( stretch out the five fingers and then let them relax)
3. Keep breathing slowly and evenly. Reassure the prisoner that they will be all right.
DepressionPrison officers need to be alert to the tell-tale signs of depression so that they can send the prisoners for a thorough medical or psycological examination. The depression signs :- feeling miscrable-feeling listless or lacking in energy-lack of interest in usual activities'being irritable-sleeping poorly-losing interest in food-losing weight-feeling guilty over things that are not particully important-feeling useless-feeling hopeless about things-thinking that things will never get any better-saying that there is no point in carrying on-talking about to die
Prison officers can help :
1. Listen carefully. try to show that you are interested in the prisoner's difficulty and that youare sympathetic.
2. Try to give hope to prisoners. Suggest ways in which things might be improved. Do notpromise anything that you can not be sure of, but try to think of ways in which the situationcould be helped.
3.If there are pratical problems that can be solved.
4. Encourage the prisoner to keep up their activities.
5. Do not tell the prisoner just to snap out of it, or that they are stupid to worry or getdepressed over the way things are. You may think that prisoner is miserable unnecessarily.
Suicide attemps
Suicide attemps are complicated issues.The suggestions of handling it :
1. Show understanding (use listening skills)
2. Try to give hope that there will be a solution
3. Think of any practical suggestions that might hepl.
4. Keep the prisoner in contact with staff or other prisoners.
5.Keep the prisoner occupied.
CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR - HOW IT DEVELOPS
Why do some people become criminals ? Is it merely because they are evil, wicked or bad. Or is it more complicated than that ? Criminal are all different , so they are all likely to affend for different reasons. There is no one simple explanation for criminal behaviour. We should not forget that many people break tehe law every day and do not get caught. We all know people who break teh lawa, but who are never arrested. They are classed as "non-criminal". Others who commit the same offences, but are caught : are classed as "criminals".
To understand criminal behaviour we have to consider some factors (David J. Copke, Pamela J. Baldwin, and Jacqueline Howison, 1990) :
1. Early Environment
A person's early environment can set them off along the path towards criminality. It is almost a cliche that criminals come from a "broken home". It is true that a lot of criminals come from home where their parents were separated or divorced. If their father get into fights, breaks into houses, steals car or sells heroin, then these forms of criminal behaviour are seen as normal by children. If they do not excercise any control or discipline, so the chances of the child getting into delinquent habits are much greater. This raises two important points : the quality of yor upbringging - how your parents looked after you - rather than where you are brought up which seems to matter. Second, some people seem to be vulnerable to bad influences. Some people who are exposed to bad influences are unaffected by them, others - the vulnerable people - start breaking the law. Human behaviour is complex.
2. Heredity
It is different to unravel the influences of heredity from the influence of early upbringging. People inherit criminal tendencies, it is little evidence. The most people genetic theory of recent years was the XYY theory. An extra Y chromosome made men become aggressive psychopaths. But you could not distinguish between the behaviour of "normal" men and the behaviour of XYY men.
3. Socio-economic status
They are unemployed they are more likely to commit crimes than when they are in employment. They are unemployed they have more oppurtunity to commit crime.
4. Current living circumstances
How you are living and where you are living seem to effect criminal behaviour; the acts of vandalism seem easy to commit.
5. Crises and negative events
Crises and negative events in our lives can cause all sort of psychological problems. Negative events can trigger problems from anxiety an depression. Negative events can also lead to effending.
To understand criminal behaviour we have to consider some factors (David J. Copke, Pamela J. Baldwin, and Jacqueline Howison, 1990) :
1. Early Environment
A person's early environment can set them off along the path towards criminality. It is almost a cliche that criminals come from a "broken home". It is true that a lot of criminals come from home where their parents were separated or divorced. If their father get into fights, breaks into houses, steals car or sells heroin, then these forms of criminal behaviour are seen as normal by children. If they do not excercise any control or discipline, so the chances of the child getting into delinquent habits are much greater. This raises two important points : the quality of yor upbringging - how your parents looked after you - rather than where you are brought up which seems to matter. Second, some people seem to be vulnerable to bad influences. Some people who are exposed to bad influences are unaffected by them, others - the vulnerable people - start breaking the law. Human behaviour is complex.
2. Heredity
It is different to unravel the influences of heredity from the influence of early upbringging. People inherit criminal tendencies, it is little evidence. The most people genetic theory of recent years was the XYY theory. An extra Y chromosome made men become aggressive psychopaths. But you could not distinguish between the behaviour of "normal" men and the behaviour of XYY men.
3. Socio-economic status
They are unemployed they are more likely to commit crimes than when they are in employment. They are unemployed they have more oppurtunity to commit crime.
4. Current living circumstances
How you are living and where you are living seem to effect criminal behaviour; the acts of vandalism seem easy to commit.
5. Crises and negative events
Crises and negative events in our lives can cause all sort of psychological problems. Negative events can trigger problems from anxiety an depression. Negative events can also lead to effending.
AGGRESSION
AGGRESSION
Aggression and violence are often used closely. Violence is aphysical attack : fighting, punching, kicking, using wepon. And aggression has a more general meaning, not just physical assaults : refer to verbal attcks or even just a hostile attitude.Kinds of aggressionCriminal aggression and violence differ from the sort of aggression in every day life. Despite it, the nature of criminal and 'normal' aggression is the same.
The causes and feeling involved are similar : criminal violence is merely a more extreme expression of them.To understand criminal aggression, star to look at 'normal' aggression. Anger can be very strong emotion. Feeling of anger may not be the only reason why people act aggressively. For the prison officer, anger to make the prisoner change his behaviour. However, people way act aggressively for two main reasons : 1) because of angry feeling, or 2) as a means of getting what they want. Most aggresive actions involve some element of gain : of mone, status publicity, etc, and some element of emotion : anger, frustration, or jealousy.
What makes people aggressive ?People may feel annoyed and up by acting aggresively in response to things and people around them and also to their own physical and mental states : will be discribed in four different part :
1. what a person feels inside (physically and mentally) :Tiredness is a common state which people say makes them prone to aggression. Pain , especially something like a toothache, and hunger can also make people more irritable than usual. Drink, drugs and some foods, other factors can influence the likelihood of some one acting aggressively, especially for people have less control over their temper. So , we have considered those factors inside ourselver, both mental an physical, which contribute to aggressive feelings an actions.
2. the degree of discomfort in the surroundings :temperature and noise have been mentioned specifically, but other elements in environtment which have an unpleasent effect on any senses might arouse aggressive responses in us.
3. the behaviour of others :why does a person who feel aggressive act that feeling in one situation but not in anthoer ? It depends on how others act towards him. People lose oppurtunity to do something, also make they angry. The main somponent, in violence and aggression is the way a person deals with others and how they behave toward him.4. personla thoughts :thoughts and behaviour are closely linked. A person's thoughts, both about him or herself an about others, can be a powerfull influence on his or her reactions to situations and the chances of aggression occuring.
Aggression and violence are often used closely. Violence is aphysical attack : fighting, punching, kicking, using wepon. And aggression has a more general meaning, not just physical assaults : refer to verbal attcks or even just a hostile attitude.Kinds of aggressionCriminal aggression and violence differ from the sort of aggression in every day life. Despite it, the nature of criminal and 'normal' aggression is the same.
The causes and feeling involved are similar : criminal violence is merely a more extreme expression of them.To understand criminal aggression, star to look at 'normal' aggression. Anger can be very strong emotion. Feeling of anger may not be the only reason why people act aggressively. For the prison officer, anger to make the prisoner change his behaviour. However, people way act aggressively for two main reasons : 1) because of angry feeling, or 2) as a means of getting what they want. Most aggresive actions involve some element of gain : of mone, status publicity, etc, and some element of emotion : anger, frustration, or jealousy.
What makes people aggressive ?People may feel annoyed and up by acting aggresively in response to things and people around them and also to their own physical and mental states : will be discribed in four different part :
1. what a person feels inside (physically and mentally) :Tiredness is a common state which people say makes them prone to aggression. Pain , especially something like a toothache, and hunger can also make people more irritable than usual. Drink, drugs and some foods, other factors can influence the likelihood of some one acting aggressively, especially for people have less control over their temper. So , we have considered those factors inside ourselver, both mental an physical, which contribute to aggressive feelings an actions.
2. the degree of discomfort in the surroundings :temperature and noise have been mentioned specifically, but other elements in environtment which have an unpleasent effect on any senses might arouse aggressive responses in us.
3. the behaviour of others :why does a person who feel aggressive act that feeling in one situation but not in anthoer ? It depends on how others act towards him. People lose oppurtunity to do something, also make they angry. The main somponent, in violence and aggression is the way a person deals with others and how they behave toward him.4. personla thoughts :thoughts and behaviour are closely linked. A person's thoughts, both about him or herself an about others, can be a powerfull influence on his or her reactions to situations and the chances of aggression occuring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)