Smith ScholarWorks Theses, Dissertations, and Projects 2015 The challenge of moral difference : a theoretical investigation of encounters with a client's capacity for violence Sarah K. Brady Smith College Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.smith.edu/theses Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Brady, Sarah K., "The challenge of moral difference : a theoretical investigation of encounters with a client's capacity for violence" (2015). Masters Thesis, Smith College, Northampton, MA. https://scholarworks.smith.edu/theses/708 This Masters Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations, and Projects by an authorized administrator of Smith ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Sarah Kathleen Brady The Challenge of Moral Difference: A Theoretical Investigation of Encounters with a Client’s Capacity for Violence ABSTRACT Clinical social workers face an ethical imperative to work with a range of clients, some of whom will undoubtedly espouse views and confess to violent behavior that will differ, sometimes profoundly, with the worker’s own personal moral compass and the values of the social work profession. How are clinical social workers to navigate the potential impasses that arise from such encounters? This theoretical thesis explores the dilemma of engaging with a client whose morality is experienced by the worker as untenable. It draws on two bodies of theory, moral anthropology and relational psychoanalysis—both of which emphasize contingency, circumstance, and the role of social phenomena in shaping an individual's subjectivity and identities. These bodies of theory are applied to two cases set in apartheid and post-apartheid South Africa (Gobodo-Madikizela, 2003; Straker, 2007a). While these cases focus on the extremes of human behavior in a particular historical and cultural locale, they also offer a paradigm of what it means to face a client whose morality profoundly differs from one’s own and how one might overcome the impasse precluding empathy for the client’s subjectivity and recognition of his or her human dignity. THE CHALLENGE OF MORAL DIFFERENCE: A THEORETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ENCOUNTERS WITH A CLIENT’S CAPACITY FOR VIOLENCE A project based on an investigation, submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Social Work Sarah Kathleen Brady Smith College School for Social Work Northampton, Massachusetts 01063 2015 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many, many thanks… …to my thesis advisor, Josh Miller, Ph.D., for his steady encouragement, patience, and interest in the spirit of this project. ...to Jennelle, Chrissy, Mara, Helen, Suzi, and my mom for their various efforts calming, inspiring, coaching, and proof-reading. …and to Will for his endless support, companionship, and humor. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................... iii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 II AN ENCOUNTER WITH AN OTHER'S CAPACITY FOR VIOLENCE ..................... 8 III MORAL ANTHROPOLOGY .......................................................................................... 13 IV RELATIONAL PSYCHOANALYSIS ............................................................................ 19 V DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 29 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 45 FOOTNOTES ........................................................................................................................... 50 iii CHAPTER I Introduction I am human, I consider nothing human alien to me. — Terence Whatever cultural conditioning we may do, we must remain cognizant of the fact that human beings who have been trained and conditioned to be nonviolent retain the capacity for violence; as constrained as that capacity may be in certain contexts, it can come out in others. It is subdued, reduced, dormant yes. But it is never abolished. It is never nonexistent. It is always there. — The Tangled Wing: Biological Constraints on the Human Spirit (Konnor, 2002). Clinical social workers through the course of their careers will likely encounter individuals whose views and actions conflict, sometimes profoundly, with their own personal moral compass and the values of the social work profession. For example, social workers may work with clients who hold racist, sexist, or homophobic opinions; these clients may act on behalf of these views thus contributing to the violation and harm of oppressed populations. Social workers in prison and rehabilitation settings may work with persons convicted of such crimes as murder, rape, torture, child abuse, and hate crimes, among others. The perpetrators of such acts may have been guided by particular beliefs and values. In global contexts, social workers in refugee camps may be asked to assist individuals who have committed heinous offenses in the name of civil war and related political conflicts. How are social workers to uphold the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Code of Ethics that forbids 1 discrimination based on a client's beliefs when those beliefs contradict one’s own moral compass and the mission of the profession? A non-discriminatory stance, respecting the inherent dignity and worth of all clients may seem possible in hypothetical terms; it might be a much more difficult feat in practice particularly when one comes face-to-face with a perpetrator who believes his actions were justified. The following questions guide this project and represent dilemmas with which I grapple in my development as a clinical social worker: What transpires when a clinician encounters an individual who has perpetrated a morally atrocious act—an act that the clinician personally and professionally might consider to be evil? How do we, as social workers, hold in mind the latent humanity of such a person? How do we struggle to empathize with the thoughts and feelings motivating his or her actions? How do we conceptualize the role of the social environment in shaping one’s actions? How do we conceive of separating the person from the act? How do we uphold the ethics of the profession when we experience moral revulsion? In addition to the requirement to respect the inherent dignity of the person, the NASW Code of Ethics (2008) specifies the need to honor diversity across groups and individuals. The Code states: Social workers should obtain education about and seek to understand the nature of social diversity and oppression with respect to race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, and mental or physical disability. Differences in morality are likely connected to an individual's multiple identities, and are perhaps “as fundamental as those more common categories of difference” (Suchet, 2007, p. 167). It is essential to explore the relationship of moralities and identities—not as theoretical and 2 hypothetical constructs, but as lived realities. A person’s morals and values, when considered at all, are typically seen as the choice of the individual. How might they be understood as the sequelae of multiple phenomena embedded in a particular sociocultural environment? Lastly, understanding the moral motivations behind violence as it is perpetrated at the hands of individuals is important for meeting the social work profession’s obligation to the broader society. The Code states, “Social workers should act to prevent and eliminate domination of, exploitation of, and discrimination against any person, group, or class.” This task requires delving into and facing the psychological underpinnings whereby some individuals and groups dominate, exploit, and discriminate other individuals and groups. As social workers we cannot dismiss or shy away from both sides of the oppressor/oppressed dynamic. If we are to effectively help those who have been caught in this relational dynamic with the hope of preventing future repetitions, then we need to be able to work with victims and perpetrators alike. In addition, clinical social workers have a public obligation to “challenge denigrating myths and stereotypes by presenting narratives that both affirm the universality of the human condition and describe clients in all their complexity” (Miller & Schamess, 2000, p. 56). Apart from the NASW ethical commitments, there is also a therapeutic ethical imperative for clinicians to find it within themselves to honor the subjective experiences of their clients in service of offering effective clinical care. This entails struggling “to gain access to that which is culturally dissociated, to that which feels unbearable, unsymbolizable, and beyond reach, in both patient and ourselves (Suchet, 2010, p. 167). This process of understanding and recognition of an Other may destabilize the clinician as it often involves “psychological turmoil, and moral confusion” (Jackson, 2002, p. 257). Jessica Stern’s (2003) on-the-ground research to understand religious terrorists offers a glimpse at the seemingly impossible task of seeing