Stop Femicide!

Cited as follows:

Gammonley, D., Rotabi, K. S., Forte, J., & Martin, A. (in press). Beyond study abroad: A human rights delegation to teach policy advocacy. Journal of Social Work Education.

The social work professions deep commitment to global human rights dates back to Jane Addamss peace work and the earliest inception of a United Nations (UN) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Healy, 2008; Reichert, 2003, 2006). Ife (2008) proposed a definition of human rights as applied to the social work profession that expands upon thefamiliar three generations of civil, social and economic, and collective rights embodied in the UNs definition of those rights which are inherent in our nature and without which we cannot live as human beings (as cited in Reichert, 2003, p. 38). Ife (2008) valued human rights as universal freedoms while acknowledging how certain conditions (national origin, race, culture, age, sex, etc.) impact some groups who try to exercise their inherent human rights. He also viewed social justice as complementary rather than distinct from human rights for social work practice. Lundy and van Wormer (2007) provided a helpful clarification on the distinction between social justice and human rights, citing the work of Reichert (2003) and van Wormer (2004):

Whereas social and economic justice is a general term that relates to society in general, human rights is a term that, from the point of view of the people, refers to specific universal standards relevant to freedom and well-being, personal and collective rights. (Lundy & van Wormer, 2007, p. 728)

Advancement of human rights remains a core value and purpose of the profession along with the other defining tenet of social justice (Council on Social Work Education, 2008; Sewpaul & Jones, 2004). As the global academic discourse on the place of universal human rights in social work practice evolves, recognition grows concerning the importance of human rights education in the social work curriculum (Dewes & Roche, 2001; Steen, 2006). It now is a core competency in the curriculum of programs accredited by the U.S. Council on Social Work Education (CSWE; 2008).

Attention to human rights education is not entirely new. In 1994, the UN produced a training manual for social work educators on global human rights that emphasized the interdependence of all human peoples. It provided a recommended framework for practitioners to analyze and respond to human rights violations with vulnerable populations, focusing particular attention to the UN Declaration of Human Rights and other legal instruments (Centre for Human Rights, 1994). The professions recent emphasis on competency-based education now requires us to expand upon this content-focused approach to human rights education. Incorporating experiential learning is a promising strategy to transform the way we teach policy advocacy practice behaviors for human rights work.

Tibbitts (2005) discussed human rights education and transformative models of engagement and identified a multifaceted approach including cognitive, affective, and experiential learning. In Tibbitts (2005) discussion, which included considerations for empowerment, the author stated that human rights education is not merely about valuing and respecting human rights, but about fostering personal action in order to guarantee these conditions (p. 107). A critical method for building a personal action approach is non-formal education, which emanated from Freires (1970) popular education. This pedagogy seeks to promote organization and empowerment of marginalized peoples through participatory group activities to raise consciousness (Freire, 1970; Rossatto, 2005). In describing an emerging experiential model for social work human rights education, we also consider its relevance for promoting the acquisition of core social work policy advocacy competencies in a global context.

To achieve this aim, we provide examples of findings from a study-abroad human rights delegation and policy after-actions to present the educational strategy.

Study Abroad and Social Work Education for Human Rights

A study abroad experience focused on human rights in the host country offers active engagement for students in acquiring knowledge of human rights by exposing them to values about human rights and providing them opportunities to develop practice skills. Practice behaviors demonstrating human rights knowledge and values include skills in implementing awareness campaigns, educational interventions, policy advocacy, and the actual documentation of human rights testimony (Rotabi, Weil & Gamble, 2004). Social workers are uniquely skilled in all of these areas, including the development of a multifaceted advocacy approach (Jansson, 2007). Focal points include advancing attention to specific human rights abuses in addition to analyzing underlying social justice issues (Steen & Mathieson, 2005).

Policy advocacy for human rights can be a powerful instrument for global community building and social change (Rotabi, Weil & Gamble, 2004; Gamble & Weil, 2010). Careful attention to ethical engagement abroad, obligations of reciprocity in international exchanges, and teaching empowerment (Rotabi, Gammonley & Gamble, 2006) can help social work educators make global learning for human rights an effective tool for developing student competence in policy advocacy at home and abroad. Expanding the notion of context in teaching social work beyond the traditional person-in-environment focus is prescribed by the new CSWE Educational

Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS). Current standards include a specific competency area (Educational Policy 2.1.9) related to responding to contexts that shape practice (Holloway,Black, Hoffman, & Pierce, 2008).

Study abroad is a unique opportunity to understand cultural context and how it affects the person-in-environment. A study abroad course on global human rights captures the dynamic interplay of social problems, policy initiatives, legal issues, and international strategies for social change intended by EPAS 2.1.9. This interplay is summarized in Table 1, and further detailed within the descriptions of delegate activities. The table provides examples reflective of competency 2.1.9 as well as the two additional EPAS most relevant to this educational approach:

EPAS 2.1.5Advance human rights and social and economic justice and EPAS 2.1.8Engage in policy practice to advance social and economic well-being and to deliver effective social work services.

Table I

Study abroad course offerings enhance global understanding (Gammonley, Rotabi & Gamble, 2007) and are often comparative in nature, focusing on differences in social policy and social intervention models. At least one such course focuses on human rights as the overarching theme in Germany, including genocide as a concept (E. Reichert, personal communication, January 26, 2010), whereas another model focuses exclusively on the Holocaust with a trip to Poland (Rosenblum, 2007). In courses taking place in developing nations, human rights are typically covered as at least one course objective, but rights are less often the central topic (Rotabi, Gammonley & Gamble, 2006). Study abroad also frequently incorporates student projects, such as building a school in Ghana (Buerlein, 2007) or providing improved stoves in Guatemala (Abell, 2009). This transformative learning (Tibbitts, 2005) model is powerful, but often there is a lack of sustained involvement when students return to their routines in the United States (Buerlein, 2007). In contrast, policy advocacy education abroad may find that its major accomplishments begin abroad but take on greater depth and focus upon return to the United States. This became evident while our delegation was immersed in the Guatemalan context.

The Guatemalan Context

The authors were participants in and facilitators of a human rights delegation to Guatemala in August 2009, with a total of 15 delegates from the United States (many of whom were professional social workers, social work students, or other human service providers). Although some delegates were engaged in research, the authors did not initially conceptualize the delegation as an educational model. The process is indicative of an emergent model linking study abroad with human rights education. As the model came into focus, the authors began discussion among themselves about the experience as a case study of human rights education providing policy advocacy as a tangible product while in-country and upon return. Here, we present the context and structure of the delegation, describe its engagement in human rights testimony processes, and detail post-delegation policy advocacy actions of delegates. Case studies outline activities and non-formal educational approaches to acquiring key human rights knowledge domains, values, and practice behaviors for policy advocacy. These are summarized in Table 1. By integrating delegation findings with policy advocacy actions, we aim to illustrate how reciprocity in global exchange is a strategy to promote acquisition of knowledge, values, and practice behaviors using study abroad that advances human rights.

Guatemala suffered the longest war in the Americas, lasting 36 years from 19601996, during which 200,000 people were systematically tortured and killed, 50,000 people were forcibly disappeared, 626 recorded massacres were committed by government forces, and over 400 villages were completely destroyed under the governments scorched earth policy (Oficina de Derechos Humanos del Arzobispado de Guatemala, 1999). The Peace Accords were signed in 1996, bringing an official end to the war. However, violence prevails today, 15 years after the Accords. In 2008, a total of 10,000 women were reported raped (Fieser, 2009) and more than 5,000 women have been murdered since 2000 (Guatemala Human Rights Commission [GHRCUSA], 2009a ). Less than 2% of these crimes have resulted in criminal investigation and legal prosecution (Guatemala Human Rights Commission [GHRC-USA], 2009a, 2009b). Despite graphic press accounts, international outrage (Portenier, 2006), and U.S. Senate Resolution #178 (2007) condemning femicide in Guatemala, this violence continues unabated, and is largely ignored by the Guatemalan government, law enforcement, and the judicial system (United States Agency for International Development [USAID] Guatemala, 2008).

The delegation, sponsored by the GHRC-USA, was part of the broader For the Womens Right to Live campaign (see www.GHRC-USA.org). As the campaign title suggests, femicide and violence against women is so extreme in Guatemala (Amnesty International, 2006; GHRC-USA, 2009a, 2009b), that the fundamental right to live was an overarching theme of the delegation. The focus on violence against women broke down into three interrelated areas: femicide, domestic violence, and rape. Human trafficking and drug trafficking also affect Guatemalan womens right to live; these connections were explained in testimony by Guatemalan human rights advocates.

During the delegations visit, female survivors of violence, family members of victims, and Guatemalan advocates for women shared their testimony with the delegates. They asked for international support through solidarity and actions to help move cases through the national and international justice system.

Witnessing testimony of femicide and impunity as a policy advocacy practice behavior. Femicide, the killing of women by men simply because they are women was first recognized as a legal construct in the 1800s and applied to womens issues in the 1980s (GHRCUSA, 2009a; Russell & Harmes, 2001). This gender crime is a form of terror that strikes fear at multiple levels, including the community. Women's bodies are often left in public places with signs of torture or ritualistic abuses (i.e., dismemberment and body parts being distributed in multiple locations throughout the locality). Femicide occurs in many countries, including Cuidad Jurez in Mexico and bride burning in India (Khan, 2009). Guatemala has the highest rate of femicide in the western hemisphere, and a historical lack of response from government or civil society, specifically in law enforcement and prosecution, which contributes to impunity(Costantino, 2006; Sanford, 2008). Femicide is a brutal reality in Guatemala. Women are aware that they risk being abused and killed in the community as they walk to work, to school, or just as they go about daily routines.

Table 2

The GHRC data presented in Table 2 indicate that 5,500 reported cases of femicide occurred between 2000 and 2010 with an alarming increase over the past decade. Official Guatemalan government statistics also document a trend of increasing homicides against women noting a rate of 6.076 homicides per 100,000 women in the first half of 2009 (Centro de Coordinacin de Informacin Interinstitucional, 2009). In contrast, a recent U.S. Bureau of Justice analysis notes a decline in the overall rate of female homicides since the early 1990s with a rate of 2.38 per 100,000 in 2007 (Catalano, Smith & Snyder, 2009).

There are several core factors that contribute to the incidence of femicide, including the legacy of violence left over from a 36-year war, culturally defined attitudes towards gender roles (machismo), lack of representation of women in positions of political and economic power, impunity, lack of political will to effect change, corruption and inefficiency in the judicial system and national police force, and lack of rule of law in Guatemala (United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2010). The effects of femicide include destroying community and a sense of citizens safety and producing a chaotic environment in which the state appears to be impotent in caring for the welfare of its people (Costantino, 2006). Whether carried out by gangs, drug traffickers, domestic abusers, or other individuals or groups (including the police), the message of fear is clear and paralyzing at the community level, as we learned from the testimony of survivors.

As a practice behavior, witnessing testimony incorporates elements of constructivist therapy through the co-creation of a narrative between the storyteller and the witness (White & Epston, 1990). As shown in Table 1, effective witnessing of testimony requires foundational knowledge about the causes of human rights violations as well as practice strategies to restore them or prevent their loss by documenting oral history. In the realm of human rights policy advocacy, witnessing is both a group and individual act requiring deep listening before attempting to engage in dialogue with the storyteller. A key distinction between witnessing for the purpose of policy advocacy and witnessing as a clinical intervention to resolve trauma is the focus on retelling the story for the purpose of promoting community actions, policy reforms, and justice. Therefore, it is critical that social workers involved in short-term human rights study activities abroad engage only with witnesses who seek a public re-telling of their story to avoid harming those in need of an emergent trauma intervention.

Among the most profoundly disturbing of the 14 testimonies witnessed by delegates was that of Rosa Franco, who shared testimony of her grief and trauma in the hopes of securing justice. Ms. Francos daughter, Maria Isabel, was a victim of femicide in 2001 at age 16. Maria Isabel was abducted in Guatemala City while walking to her part-time job. She had refused the attentions of a local drug trafficker. Ms. Franco believes that her daughter was tortured, raped, and killed by the rejected admirer. As is typical in the case in femicide, her mutilated body was publicly displayed, sending a message of fear and terror to the community.

Victims of rape rarely speak out in traditional Guatemalan society, where women are blamed for enticing, seducing, or inviting attack due to their physical appearance, clothing, unaccompanied status, time of day, or location where they work, live, or walk. Until 2006, a rapist was absolved of the crime if he chose to marry his victim (GHRC-USA, 2009c). During the internal armed conflict, rape was used as a tool of terror, torture, and control by the military, police, and paramilitary troops against Maya women and communities. In a post-conflict society still oppressed by traditional gender roles, stigmatization prevents victims from speaking out and seeking justice. In learning of several cases when rape led to femicide, as illustrated in Maria Franco's case, delegates were confronted with the profound indignity of violence against women as an affront to the worth of the person. Sexual assault and torture are often part of the crime that results in femicide. Gender-based crime sends a strong message of fear to women, girls, and families in a society that values virginal purity.

Marias is the first case of Guatemalan femicide to garner the attention of the international legal system by reaching the Inter American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) in March 2009. Impunity is evident in that the state has been complicit in the case of Maria's femicide, given the inadequate response to the crime. Ms. Franco was encouraged by the IACHR to enter into the negotiations process. Franco refused to enter into a friendly settlement agreement (agreed-upon terms) with the state; she prefers to take the case to the Inter American

Court on Human Rights in Costa Rica. The Guatemalan government has offered to name a street in her daughter's honor, but this token is seen by Franco as insincere and empty given the trauma that the family and community has endured. Impunity, central to understanding how human rights violations against women in Guatemala persist, is composed of five elements: systematic absence of punishment, a violation of human rights in and of itself (distinct from the violent act that is under investigation); as a context that in turn becomes a causal factor; as a culture, social system or cultural rgime; and as a means of social control. (Myrna Mack Foundation, 2009, p. 3)

The testimony of Dr. Gladys Monterroso illustrated impunity in Guatemala. In the spring of 2009, Gladys Monterroso, a law professor at San Carlos University, was abducted, assaulted, raped, tortured, and dumped in a public park in Guatemala City (Monterroso, 2009). The crime investigation was botched by the National Police, who contaminated evidence due to lack of training and lack of resources. Monterrosos case made the national and international press due to her high profile as a lawyer, a political party secretary, and the former wife of the Guatemalan human rights ombudsman. The Washington Post remarked:

Monterroso's kidnapping has become a symbol of Guatemala's collective trauma as the nation suffers through a huge surge in abductions and killings that have gone largelyunnoticed internationally. It is a sad reminder that the past is the present and also probably the future as impunity prevails. (Roig-Franzia, 2009, para. 5)

Delegation participants reflected upon parallel processes in the US justice system for female victims of violence. This opened a dialogue centered on defining appropriate advocacy action for delegates upon return to the United States.

A suspect in the Monterroso case was ultimately taken into preventive custody, with no evidence against him, and soon released. The investigation, involving the U.N. Special Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG), began in March 2009 and was formally declared closed six months later, with no conclusion. Two days after completing a three-week speakers tour in the United States that was organized following the delegation, Monterroso was informed by the Public Prosecutors Office that the case was re-opened for further investigation.

Monterroso and others view this case as a symbol of the climate of impunity in Guatemala in which law enforcement and prosecutorial systems fail victims and their families. Monterrosos case is one of many that demonstrate the acceptance of violence against women in Guatemalan society, a lack of political will to address the issue, and the effects on the well-being and mental health of individuals, families, and communities. A speaking tour for Dr. Monterroso was arranged by delegates upon return to the United States. This required delegates to demonstrate practice behaviors of public speaking and issue briefing at home in addition to witnessing and documenting testimony while abroad.

Table 3

As shown in Table 3, a broad range of Guatemalan survivors, advocates, labor leaders, government and non-governmental organization (NGO) officials contributed to the delegates understanding of violence against women. However, it should be noted that many of these crimes overlap. For example, rape is frequently part of femicide. Narco-trafficking, and more explicitly, human trafficking including illegal adoptions, were core knowledge acquisition areas for delegation members.

Dialogue with government officials, including Guatemalan officials and U.S. staff working for the USAID, revealed the inadequacy of the national and international responses. There is no national database or management information system to capture case-related data for further analysis. The database, according to the Guatemalan femicide law of April 2008, must include data on each femicide case, including location, time of day, weapons used, accused perpetrators, DNA evidence, and other critical information. This database was a recommendation of the U.S. Senate resolution #178 (S. 178, 2007). A total of $36.7 million dollars was spent from 2004 to 2009 on the USAID Democracy and Rule of Law program to strengthen the prosecutorial system (Trujillo, 2009); however, the database has not yet been created.

The delegates felt compelled to intervene after learning that, as of August 2009, only six domestic violence shelters operated in Guatemala, and in the six months after the delegation, two of those shelters were closed due to lack of funding. U.S. foreign policy can and should address this dearth of funding for essential programs to provide services and shelter for women who are victims of violence. Knowledge of the U.S. foreign appropriations process proved important for planning post-delegation policy advocacy actions to strengthen the international response.

Delegates more immediately applied practice behaviors of issue briefing, public speaking, negotiation, and conflict resolution skills during the final delegation meeting at the U.S. Embassy in Guatemala.

Acquiring knowledge of human trafficking and illegal intercountry adoption. Guatemala is a gateway nation for human trafficking, according to the 2009 U.S. Department of State report. Violence against women is a push factor for migration to the US. Women who are facing severe domestic violence or who are targeted by gang violence may see immigration as their only option. In August 2009, President Obama informed the Department of Homeland Security that victims of domestic violence are now eligible for asylum (Preston, 2009). The fact that domestic violence is a push factor for migration may lead some women en route to the US to become victims of trafficking provided important knowledge concerning reciprocity in global engagement (U.S. Department of State, 2009).

Guatemala also became a source of child trafficking under the disguise of some intercountry adoptions. This underscored the obligation of reciprocity in global social work practice and was further reinforced for delegates who learned about Guatemalas history of highly irregular and illegal adoptions (Bunkers, Groza, & Lauer, 2009; Gresham, Nackerud, & Risler, 2004; Rotabi, Morris & Weil, 2008). Since 1998, approximately 30,000 Guatemalan children have been adopted in the U.S. (U.S. Department of State, n. d.). Sadly, some childrens adoptions were the result of force, fraud, and coercion in the context of violence. Acquiring contextual knowledge of legal and policy issues of intercountry adoption along with other family consequences can teach students critical thinking, including causes and consequences of human trafficking, and different perspectives on the phenomena (Smolin, 2004, 2006). In the case of intercountry adoption, conceptions of child rescue verses child sales are complicated, which is a particular challenge to social workers (Bromfield & Rotabi, in press).

Policy advocacy practice behaviors: Documenting testimony and questioning governmental actors. On the last day of the delegation in Guatemala, the delegates met with U.S. embassy officials to report on their findings, ask questions, and advocate for Guatemalan womens rights. The delegates demonstrated the key policy advocacy practice skill of questioning governmental actors by asking critical questions about U.S. foreign aid policy and lack of funding for programs dedicated to the prevention of violence against women. This two hour meeting allowed each delegate to speak, ask a question, and provide valuable information gathered from Guatemalan counterparts. The delegates spent several hours preparing for the meeting, researching, drafting questions, and preparing a response.

Practice behaviors implemented to prepare for the briefing included rapidly synthesizing the various forms of data gathered during the delegation (including transcripts of testimonies, written reports from organizations, media accounts of events, and reflective daily blogs produced by the delegates) into a succinct agenda with key points for the briefing that strategically advanced the groups efforts to advocate on behalf of Guatemalan women. After spending a week together as a group, delegates used a strengths-based approach to select representatives for the group, based on writing and public speaking skills. This meeting with U.S. Department of State and USAID representatives set the stage for policy advocacy upon return home. It is a component of the GHRC-USA delegation format that is integral to the policy advocacy education for human rights model.

Policy advocacy practice behaviors: Awareness campaigns and educational interventions. As a bridge to link the brief study abroad delegation to long-term policy advocacy, each delegate filled out a commitment worksheet with a minimum of three return delegate actions that they would undertake once back in the US. An afternoon of the delegations last day in Guatemala was spent brainstorming actions, strategy, responsibilities, and timeline for advocacy by individual delegates and groups of delegates. Actions ranged from organizing a movie night to show a BBC documentary video (Killer's Paradise) to raise awareness about the issue of femicide in Guatemala, hosting a speaking event for GHRC-USAs fall 2009 tour with Gladys Monterroso, or an event for the Spring 2010 GHRC-USA tour with Norma Cruz who won an International Woman of Courage award from President Obamas administration for her advocacy work against violence (U. S. Department of State, 2009).

Delegates return actions expanded to include summarizing findings in a formal report made available online in both English and Spanish and distributed in person to Guatemalan counterparts and U.S. embassy officials. Other activities included a "lobby day" in November 2009; nine delegates visited five Senate offices and five Congressional offices to promote the International Violence Against Women Act and collaborated with another advocacy organization, Women Thrive Worldwide. Delegates were invited to the White House to meet with the Special Advisor on Violence Against Women, and to the U.S. State Department to meet with the Ambassador at Large on Global Womens Issues.

This persistent and grassroots approach to education and advocacy work was in conjunction with the re-introduction of International Violence Against Women Act (IVAWA) legislation. If passed into law, IVAWA will provide a mechanism to specifically address violence against women through U.S. foreign policy and will support innovative programs effective in reducing acts of violence. Demonstrating competence in social marketing, some delegates created a website for updates on policy advocacy and summaries of delegate meetings with U.S. government representatives.

Advancing Human Rights Education with Policy Advocacy and Reciprocity in Study Abroad

Broad social justice implications of gift giving are mostly missing from discourse in the current social work study abroad literature but emerged as a dilemma for delegates during this human rights study abroad experience. A thorough analysis of the traditional dependency model (a developed nation providing goods, services, and volunteers to impoverished people in developing nations) is a prerequisite to engaging in policy advocacy focused on human rights in a study abroad host country. Reinforcing the dependency model risks violating the empowerment of a people, further entrenching the effects of neoliberal economic models, or taking away opportunities for leadership at the local level (Bendaa, 2005). Some host governments, including Guatemala, depend on outsiders to supply children with basic needs (i.e., foreign church-run institutions and schools built by external and foreign funding).

This dynamic of international giving has changed the policy landscape for the Guatemalan government. Many international organizations provide services, freeing the Guatemalan government to neglect the provision of basic services. This mission form of giving has some positive aspects in the short term by providing immediate satisfaction to impoverished recipients (children and families). However, there are long-term policy advocacy implications that must be considered when social work students engage in gift-giving to meet basic welfare needs or when honorariums are provided to local community organizations and individuals providing testimony. Critical and ethical questions were posed and debated by the delegation, including questioning the obligations of the state and responsibilities of social work educators. For example, during the delegation, several womens rights organizations received honorariums for their time. The small monetary donation recognized the time spent with our delegation as a show of mutual respect. Individuals also received honorariums and reimbursement for expenses (e.g., travel costs) as compensation for taking a day off from work and for expenses incurred. These were provided not as aid, but in recognition of our responsibility to promote reciprocity and mutual respect in building international and mutual relationships by working together towards a common goal: ending violence against women in Guatemala. Those who gave testimony, as much as the delegates who documented the testimony, understood this transactional process as a strategy to value the dignity and worth of the women engaged in this human rights work. The delegates commitment to take action upon returning to the US to work towards Womens Right to Live in Guatemala illustrated the value of integrity required of competent human rights practice in social work.

Reciprocity was further promoted to support Guatemalan women directly in purchasing fair trade goods from the Maya women in a rural Mam community. The group purchased weavings from a womens cooperative only after being invited into the homes of the women and learning about their business model and daily existence through interacting for an entire afternoon in the home of one of the women. The proceeds of the sales went directly into the hands of the women artists. In the proposed educational model, reciprocity requires delegates to commit to policy advocacy for the long term. Thus far, delegates have focused their attention on promotion of IVAWA, U.S. foreign policy support for programs on violence against women, and raising awareness among the U.S. public to demand an end to impunity for perpetrators of violence against women. Policy advocacy for social change necessitates respect for the other allows opportunities for organic empowerment and avoids traditional top-down donor models, to promote global social work education for human rights.

Assessing Learning Outcomes in Global Human Rights Policy Advocacy Education

Although learning outcomes were not formally assessed in the Guatemala delegation, several areas to consider are clear. First, both short- and long-term student-learning outcomes should be addressed. Study abroad incorporates cognitive, affective, and experiential learning and has been associated with improved intercultural competence among students (Sutton & Rubin, 2010). Enhancing study abroad with prolonged engagement in advocacy activities during and after a study abroad experience has the potential to impact additional areas. The International Partnership for Service Learning and Leadership (2003), for example, identifies participatory leadership capabilities, greater maturity in value-based and ethical decision making, and the ability to work collaboratively as anticipated learning outcomes for students who engage in service activities abroad.

Formally evaluating learning outcomes according the actual outcomes of policy advocacy initiatives poses a challenge. Ultimate success in achieving concrete international policy reform, settled legal actions, expanded international aid, or initiated community change within the short time frame of the experience abroad, or even a two-year master of social work program is not certain. Student demonstration of the practice behaviors described in this article can occur by documenting and disseminating testimony, initiating and conducting awareness and fund-raising campaigns, and delivering testimony targeted to policy reform actions. In addition to standardized assessment tools to assess gains in intercultural competence, social work educators may find using personal reflection exercises helpful. These can assess student abilities to integrate cognitive and affective learning through global policy advocacy education in the short term.

Final Reflections on Teaching in This Format

It should be noted that this emerging human rights policy advocacy educational model relies on the ongoing integration of a nongovernmental advocacy organization, in this case the U.S.-based Guatemala Human Rights Commission, which was founded in 1982 and has been advocating for policy change to support Guatemalans for the past 29 years. It has long been acknowledged that the most critical human rights work has been carried out by NGOs such as Amnesty International (Khan, 2009). GHRC-USA invests in the delegation experience as a transformative opportunity for individuals to learn; organize their communities; and advocate for positive, systemic change for the Guatemalan people.

Finally, this experiential education model helps bring to life the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and corollary documents like the Convention to Eliminate Discrimination Against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Witnessing testimony, documenting these experiences, and engaging in policy advocacy makes human rights concepts tangible and approachable. Listening to testimony highlights the nature of poverty (Khan, 2009) as a core thread for those affected by grave human rights abuses. Social work students are required to ask critical questions about global poverty, the role of the host government, and the U.S.s role and obligations in foreign policy. As Tibbitts (2005) pointed out, transformative human rights education affects students at the cognitive and affective levels. Bearing witness to the Guatemalan womens testimony of violence requires openness, a willingness to be vulnerable and assertive in a foreign environment, and emotional risk. Hearing shocking stories, such as one told about a woman who went to the police to report her rape only to be raped again by the authorities, requires that students be prepared before embarking on a human rights delegation. Careful screening of students interested in this type of human rights study abroad experience, skillful facilitation of participant reflections, and debriefing is absolutely essential so that responses to trauma experienced by delegates are responded to sensitively and professionally.

By using the nonformal or popular education approach to this work (Freire, 1970; Rossatto, 2005), both cognitive and affective changes in students were attended to in structured daily delegate reflection and debriefing sessions as well as informal interactions. As delegates moved through different levels of recognition, awareness, and knowledge acquisition, many feelings and emotions surfaced. Some delegates shared their experiences, including prio personal experiences with violence in the US. The intensive learning experience during a human rights delegation abroad requires the social work facilitator to draw upon clinical practice skills and group dynamics training to achieve transformative learning inclusive of peace building through social and personal transformation (Tibbitts, 2005).

References

Abell, M. (2009). Guatemala stove project. In D. P. Fauri, S. P. Wernet, & F. E. Netting (Eds.), Cases in macro social work practice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Amnesty International. (2006). Guatemala: No protection, no justice: Killings of women in Guatemala. Retrieved from http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGAMR340172005

Bendaa, A. (2005). From peace building to state building: One step forward and two steps back? Development, 48(3), 5-15. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.development.1100159

Bromfield, N. F. & Rotabi, K. S. (in press) article). The Haitian child abduction attempt: Policy analysis of human trafficking laws and implications for social workers. Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics.

Buerlein, R. (2007). International service work: What happens after service is over? Reflections: Narrative of Professional Helping, 13 (4), 44-49.

Bunkers, K. M., Groza, V., & Lauer, D. (2009). International adoption and child protection in Guatemala: A case of the tail wagging the dog. International Social Work, 52(5), 649-660. doi: 10.1177/0020872809337676

Catalano, S., Smith, E., & Snyder, H. (2009). Bureau of Justice Statistics selected findings: Female victims of violence. Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fvv.pdf

Centre for Human Rights. (1994). Human rights and social work: A manual for schools of social work and the social work profession. (Professional Training Series No. 1). Retrieved

from

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/training1en.pdf

23

Centro de Coordinacin de Informacin Interinstitucional [Coordinating Center of

Interinstitutional Information]. (2009).

Personas de sexo femenino fallecidas ao 2009.

[Female persons who died in 2009].

Retrieved from http://www.conaprevi.org.gt/files/

mujerescecoin.pdf

Council on Social Work Education. (2008).

Educational policy and accreditation standards.

Retrieved from http://www.cswe.org/File.aspx?id=13780

Costantino, R. (2006). Femicide, impunity, and citizenship: The old and new in the struggle for justice in Guatemala. The Journal of Mujeres Activistas en Letras y Cambio Social, 6(1), 107-121.

Dewes, M. & Roche, M. (2001). Teaching about human rights in social work. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 21(1-2), 137-155. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J067v21n01_09

Fieser, E. (2009, November 20). Guatemala slowly confronts widespread rape of women. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved from: http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/content/view/print/265674

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Paz e Terra.

Gamble, D. N., & Weil, M. (2010). Community practice skills: Local to global perspective. New York: Columbia University.

Gammonley, D., Rotabi, K. S., & Gamble, D. N. (2007) article). Enhancing global understanding with study abroad: Ethically grounded approaches to international learning. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 27 (3/4), 115-135.

Gresham, K., Nackerud, L., & Risler, E. (2004). Intercountry adoption from Guatemala and the United States: A comparative policy analysis. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, (3/4), 1-20. doi:10.1300/J191v01n03_01

Guatemala Human Rights Commission/USA. (2009a). Fact sheet: Femicide and feminicide. Retrieved from http://www.GHRC-USA.org/Publications/FemicideFactSheet2009.pdf

Guatemala Human Rights Commission/USA. (2009b). Guatemalas endangered species: Women support I-VAWA. Retrieved from http://www.GHRC-USA.org/Publications/IVAWAGuatemalaFactSheet.pdf

Guatemala Human Rights Commission/USA. (2009c). Guatemalas femicide law: Progress against impunity? Retrieved from http://www.GHRC-USA.org/Publications/Femicide_Law_ProgressAgainstImpunity.pdf

Healy, L. M. (2008). Exploring the history of social work as a human rights profession. International Social Work, 51,

735-748. doi:10.1177/0020872808095247

Hollingsworth, L. D. (2003). International adoption among families in the United States: Considerations of social justice. Social Work, 48(2), 209217.

Holloway, S., Black, P., Hoffman, K., & Pierce, D. (2008). Some considerations of the import of 2008 for curriculum design. Retrieved from http://www.cswe.org/File.aspx?id=31578

Ife, J., & Fiske, L. (2006). Human rights and community work: Complementary theories and practices. International Social Work, 49(3), 297-308. doi: 10.1177/0020872806063403

Ife, J. (2008). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice. (2nd Ed.)Cambridge; Port Melbourne, Vic.: Cambridge University Press.

International Partnership for Service-learning and Leadership. (2003). Declaration of principles. Retrieved: http://www.ipsl.org/advocacy/declaration-of-principles.aspx

Jansson, B. S. (2007). Becoming an effective policy advocate: From policy practice to social justice.Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.

Khan, I. (2009). The unheard truth: Poverty and human rights. New York: Norton & Company.

Lundy, C. & van Wormer, K. (2007). Social and economic justice, human rights and peace:

The challenge for social work in Canada and the USA.

International Social Work,

50

(6), 727-739. doi: 10:1177/0020872807081899

Monterroso, G. (2009).

Entrevista con la Dra. Gladys Monterroso. [Interview with Dr. Gladys

Monterroso

]. Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oTHbBiv-JQ of

Guatemala

Myrna Mack Foundation. (2009).

Impunity, stigma and gender: Study of criminal case files

related to violent deaths in the Department of Guatemala (2005-2007).

Retrieved from

http://mediaresearchhub.ssrc.org/impunity-stigma-and-gender/attachment

Oficina de Derechos Humanos del Arzobispado de Guatemala [Guatemala Archbishops Office

on Human Rights] (1998).

Guatemala nunca ms: Informe proyecto interdiocesano de

recuperacin de la memoria histrica (REMHI).

[Guatemala never again: Report of the

inter-diocesan project on recovery of historical memory]

. Retrieved from

http://www.odhag.org.gt/03publicns.htm

Portenier, G. (2006, May 4).

Killers paradise. British Broadcasting Corporation. Available from

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/this_world/4965786.stm

Preston, J. (2009, October 30). USA may be open to asylum for spouse abuse.

The New York

Times.

Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/30/us/30asylum.html

26

Reichert, E. (2003).

Social work and human rights: A foundation for policy and practice. New

York: Columbia University Press.

Reichert, E. (2006).

Understanding human rights: An exercise book. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications.

Roig-Franzia, M. (2009, April 11).Gladys Monterroso, wife of Guatemalan rights official, details

kidnapping ordeal. .

The Washington Post. Retrieved from

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/

content/article/2009/04/10/AR2009041003332.html

Rosenblum, M. (2007).

Holocaust education as a journey for students to social justice. (Doctoral

dissertation). Retrieved from http://archive.uky.edu/bitstream/10225/605/

HOLOCAUST_EDUCATION_AS_A_JOURNEY_FOR_STUDENTS.pdf

Rossatto, C. A. (2005).

Engaging Paulo Freires pedagogy of possibility: From blind to

transformative optimism.

Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Rotabi, K. S., Morris, A. W. & Weil, M. O. (2008) article). International child adoption in a

post-conflict society: A multi-systemic assessment of Guatemala.

Journal of Intergroup

Relations, XXXIV

(2), 9-41.

Rotabi, K. S., Gammonley, D., & Gamble, D. N. (2006). Ethical guidelines for study abroad:

Can we transform ugly Americans into engaged global citizens?

British Journal of Social

Work, 36

(3), 467-484.

Rotabi, K. S., Weil, M. O., & Gamble, D. N. (2004). Teaching policy practice in a global

context.

The Social Policy Journal, 3 (4), 69-86.

27

Russell, D. E. H., & Harmes, R. (Eds). (2001).

Femicide in global perspective. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Sanford, V. (2008). From genocide to feminicide: Impunity and human rights in twenty-first

century Guatemala.

Journal of Human Rights, 7, 104-122. doi:

10.1080/14754830802070192

S. Res. 178, 110

th Cong., 2nd Sess. Rec. S1890-1891. (2007). (enacted).

Sewpaul, V. & Jones, D. (2004).

Global standards for the education and training of the social

work profession

. Retrieved from http://www.ifsw.org/p38000868.html

Smolin, D. M. (2006). Child laundering: How the intercountry adoption system legitimizes and

incentivizes the practices of buying, trafficking, kidnapping, and stealing children.

Wayne

Law Review, 52

(113), 113-200.

Smolin, D. M. (2004). Intercountry adoption as child trafficking.

Valparaiso University Law

Review

, 39(2), 81-325.

Sutton, R. C. & Rubin, D. L. (2010). The GLOSSARI Project: Initial findings from a systemwide

research initiative on study abroad learning outcomes. Retrieved from

http://glossari.uga.edu/

Steen, J. A., & Mathieson, S. (2005). Human rights education: Is social work behind the curve?

Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 25

(3/4), 143-156. doi: 10.1300/J067v25n03_09

Steen, J. A. (2006). The roots of human rights advocacy and a call to action.

Social Work, 51(2),

101105.

Tibbitts, F. (2005). Transformative learning and human rights education: Taking a closer look.

Intercultural Education, 16

(2), 107-113. doi: 10.1080/14675980500133465

28

Trujillo, C. (2009).

Audit of USAID/Guatemalas Democracy and Governance Program (Report

No. 1-520-10-001-P). Retrieved from

http://www.usaid.gov/oig/public/fy10rpts/

1-520-10-001-p.pdf

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2010).

Report of the United Nations

High Commissioner for Human Rights on the activities of her office in Guatemala

.

Retrieved from http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,4565c225b,

459b8a1e2,49c768892,0.html

U. S. Department of State (2009).

Dip Note: Norma Cruz: Seeking justice and dignity for

Guatemalan women.

Available from http://blogs.state.gov/index.php/entries/norma_cruz/

U.S. Department of State (n. d.). Intercountry adoption: Statistics. Available from

http://adoption.state.gov/about_us/statistics.php

U.S. Department of State. (2009).

Trafficking in persons report 2009. Retrieved from

http://guatemala.usembassy.gov/tipguate2009.html

USAID Guatemala. Programa Estado De Derecho. (2008).

Informe trimestral Julio, Agosto, y

Septiembre, 2008: Muertes violentas de mujeres

. [Quarterly report in July, August, and

September, 2008: Violent deaths of women].Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing

Office.

van Wormer, K. (2004).

Confronting oppression, restoring justice: From policy analysis to

social action

. Alexandria, VA: Council on Social Work Education.

White, M., & Epston, D. (1990).

Narrative means to therapeutic ends. New York: Norton.

Copyright ©2012 Council on Social Work Education. Reprinted with permission.