members of society” and the “focus shifts beyond the work group” that then includes all community members (Mintz, 2018). Level 3, Post-conventional Stage 5: Social Contract The fifth stage finds the person as driven by upholding the basic rights, values and legal contracts of society, as he/she “recognizes in some cases that legal and moral points of view may conflict” however, that may be reduced with the parties in conflict basing their decisions on “the greatest good for the greatest number of people” or that which is considered a “rational calculation of benefits and harm to society” (Mintz, 2018). Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principles The final stage shows abstract reasoning as basis of moral reasoning applying universal ethical principles that everyone must come after and transcend mutual benefit. “Rights, laws, and social agreements are valid not because of a particular society’s laws or customs, but because they rest on the premise of universality” such as justice and equality (Mintz, 2018). In this sixth stage that people’s moral guidelines “may or may not fit the law” as the person becomes “prepared to act to defend these principles even if it means going against the rest of society in the process and having top ay the consequences of disapproval and or imprisonment” (McLeod, 2013, p. 3). Conceptual Framework of the Study: The VAW victims-survivors as respondents are altogether the independent variable. Their decision-making process of the respondents serves as confounding variable, and the identified factors affecting their nonpursuance of the VAW case are altogether the dependent variable. This is shown in Figure A. 7