An innocent life was cut short in Taichung County last week when a toddler was beaten to death by his paternal aunt. Social workers were labeled "accomplices" in the death for incorrectly responding to the mother's requests for help.
Meanwhile in Taoyuan, an entire family threatened suicide in an attempt to claim more welfare benefits. Luckily no one came to any harm -- otherwise the social welfare department might have been accused of murder.
In recent years, there has been a dramatic increase in cases of child abuse in Taiwan. Last year there were 12,000 reported cases, more than 10 of which ended in the death of a child.
The number of registered low-income households has also doubled in eight years to 90,000, affecting more than 220,000 people.
Local governments' social welfare departments have varying numbers of social workers and have established domestic violence centers.
The national government has also created a national "1-1-3" 24-hour help hotline and initiated its "Big Warmth" welfare package.
Despite these efforts, in the eyes of most people, it seems that all government agencies can do is prevent abuse from recurring by offering guidance, aid and shelter to victims only after incidents have taken place.
Although each case is different, there are some common patterns. An analysis of child abusers reveals that aside from mothers and fathers, the main offenders are step-parents, people cohabitating with the parents and caretakers.
If the government can use information gained through inspections by social workers to compile a "high-risk data bank" of potential risk cases and decide on the timing for intervention and how services would be rendered, this could partially serve as a preventive measure.
But no matter how tight the protective net, there is no guarantee it can put an end to "abuse." If there is a case that falls through the cracks, social workers must still be investigated and the government agencies in charge should shoulder the responsibility.
But there is no need for society to invidiously attack social workers. That kind of pressure can overwhelm the young people at social services, who are sincere and take their work to heart.
The quality of social services would unlikely improve under such circumstances.
If we look at child abuse cases from a different angle, we can gain a better understanding of the root causes. Sometimes, biological parents use their child to vent their anger; sometimes children are abused by husbands and boyfriends of divorced mothers and sometimes they are entrusted to bad nannies. Most of these cases seem to be related to the phenomena of broken families, failure at parental duties, poverty and unemployment.
Members of the impoverished class are the direct victims of an economic environment that isn't performing as well as it used to.
In capitalist societies, public assistance acts as an equalizer. It cannot devote too much energy to pandering to people's endless wants, but must structure itself into a sustainable safety net. Social workers serve as protectors of modern families, but they are not a substitute for the family.
In many instances of family crisis, concern and reports from neighbors and friends can more effectively solve the problem than intervention by social workers. Only if poor families can actively work to pull themselves up can welfare measures help them succeed in leaving poverty.
Unless the economy revives and the structural problems preventing such measures are addressed, shifting limited resources from one area to another will not lead to a net gain.
Social workers, who may have just graduated from university, work in a society in which functioning families are on the wane. Faced with evermore complex family crises, they are often uncertain how far to intervene, or are conflicted over whether or not to separate family members.
New laws or curricula cannot provide an answer to all these problems. Oftentimes, only in hindsight can we tell whether the actions that were taken were right or wrong.
The quality of social workers is a mixed bag and government resources are limited. But the workers cannot remain idle, because family crises brew quietly and can be set off at the slightest touch.
People should show concern for social workers, who quietly do their utmost to help those in need. In calmer times, their efforts are hard to perceive. But they are the ones who bear the most responsibility when something bad happens, as everything they have done is called into question.
James Hsueh is a professor in the department of sociology at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Marc Langer.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS