Post date: Jan 21, 2019 2:00:06 AM
1. Introduction
Now Japan is a capitalist society, and we live there. In capitalism, competition is considered natural. However, we usually have different starting points. In particular, the situation is remarkable for minorities. For example, if a child is born to violent parents, there is a possibility that parents attack the child and that parents do not support the child sufficiently. In that case, children cannot compete with others satisfactorily. Is this justice?
When we have same starting points perfectly, the competition will be fair. In this position, we must hate every social injustice, and we must correct any social injustice. However, correcting every social injustice seems to be impossible, which means making the starting point the same also seems to be impossible. So how do we ensure the competition has justice? We have to support minorities appropriately. I think that we must particularly support children with some problems. There are two reasons. One is that children have low ability to protect themselves and to live their own lives. The other is that they must be respected as growing entities, because children are on the way to acquire the ability to live as autonomous individuals. For the above the reasons, I have researched about the child care system, for children who do not live with their parents, in Japan.
2. Current situation
In Japan, consultation offices for children（児童相談所) provide services for children who do not have parents for some reasons, or who have some problems in their family. The offices intervene in families to protect children. Thes office determine how the children are treated. For example, they can decide to use institutions to care for children（児童養護施設）or place them with foster parent（里親制度). In Japan, when children have some problems, institutions for children usually are used. Now the number of consultation about child abuse is increasing. In 1999 the number was 11,631, and in 2017 the number had risen to 133,778.[1] Thus, the need of institutions is becoming bigger.
However, institutions have a lot of problems. In 2010, the United Nations adopted Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children. Annex 22 says, "In accordance with the predominant opinion of experts, alternative care for young children, especially those under the age of 3 years, should be provided in family-based settings. Exceptions to this principle may be warranted in order to prevent the separation of siblings and in cases where the placement is of an emergency nature or is for a predetermined and very limited duration, with planned family reintegration or other appropriate long-term care solution as its outcome". And Annex 23 says "While recognizing that residential care facilities and family-based care complement each other in meeting the needs of children, where large residential care facilities (institutions) remain, alternatives should be developed in the context of an overall deinstitutionalization strategy, with precise goals and objectives, which will allow for their progressive elimination. To this end, States should establish care standards to ensure the quality and conditions that are conducive to the child’s development, such as individualized and small-group care, and should evaluate existing facilities against these standards. Decisions regarding the establishment of, or permission to establish, new residential care facilities, whether public or private, should take full account of this deinstitutionalization objective and strategy." Thus, foster parents are more appropriate than institutions.
Seiichi Kitagawa says there are some problems in institutions. First, what is target in the originality of support method? For example, it is important to analyze why the clients (the children in the institutions) use violence. If institutions do not have this analysis, the institution’s originality of support method is not effective.
Second, do the institutions have the strategy that supports and recognises the “resilience” of children or the "strengths" of families to change ? Strengths are clients’ potential to tackle some problems and grow up. Resilience is clients ability to overcome their difficulty. A return to normal life need this strength and resiliency.
Third, do institutions provide clients appropriate relief? Staff sometimes treat children inappropriately. For example, Asuka Tachikawa, who lived in institutions, said there were a lot of violence in institutions.
Fourth, can institutions explain their strategy to enable clients to have their capacity for living? If different staff act in different ways to support, it is difficult to call the strategy professional.
So institutions have bad points. The reasons are that they do not have practical approaches, shared ideals, or specialized expertise?, and they treat children individually. Of course, this situation is not good, and government tries to change this. However, normally institutions should change this themselves because in the scene of the action there are institutions. If they do not change this, they do not grow up.
On the other hand, the system of foster parents does not spread in Japan. The reason is this procedure is more complicated. Consultation offices are too busy and they do not want to use this procedure. Second reason is that government gives little support, especially funding. Foster parents raise the child. Of course, foster parents need money for raising children, and government should support them. However, the government only gives a small amount of money: A monthly allowance is 72,000Yen for 養育里親, 123,000Yen for 専門里親.
3. Approach
As mentioned above, the system of foster parents is more appropriate for children than institutions for children. However, Japan usually uses institutions. We should change this situation, but under limited resources this is difficult. むしろwe need think how institutions can be improved.
As mentioned above, one of the problem of institutions is lack of professionalism. Professionalism is based on study. In Japan, this study is not sufficient. If we want to be a staff member in an institution, we must meet the following requirements:
graduate from a Faculty of Welfare, Social Studies, Education, or Psychology
obtain a teacher’s license
graduate from a training school for children’s advisors
have practical experience in a juvenile welfare institution
Staff are sure to have specialized expertise of development, but a theory of caring is not only growth.
A second issue is that the approaches taken by the staff of institutions re very individual. Staff use too many approaches, and they never plan ahead. Staff do not have discipline, because they do not plan the approaches they use. If basic study is systematized, there will be some aims to guide the approaches that are used.
Staff of institutions must be careful because children are socially vulnerable in institutions, they live in institutions against their will and need special consideration, as well as to realize the policy of institutions. Staff should evaluate themselves and their approach, because the problems of children are individual. The right approach is determined by each individual case.
Kitagawa says staff need a “critical perspective”. Critical perspective is a method in which staff look with clients at the clients’ value and clients’ position in the client’s reality, information and thinking, and in which the staff reflect themselves and use reliable evidence. After that, staff work with with clients to reconstruct ways to support clients. A critical perspective analyzes “social structure and system”, “values”, “power relationship”, “oppression”, “cooperation”, “talk”, “hope and potential”, “strength” and “resources”. “Social structure and system”, “values”, “power relationship”, and “oppression” relate to difficulty of living. “Cooperation”, “talk”, “hope and potential”, “strength” and “resources” relate to how to share sadness and happiness. Through critical perspective, staff may be able to approach clients more appropriately. However, are staff really able to carry out a critical perspective?
4. Problems with this approach
The staff of institutions work a lot (see figure below).
[2]
When staff look at children through critical perspective, staff treat them individually. Asuka Tachikawa, who lived in an institution, says staff of institutions are too busy to take care of children better. Don’t staff have enough time to use the critical perspective? Obvioulsy, it is important that the quality of support is better. However, we cannot have staff work more things than now. So is there no way to improve the current situation?
5. Solution
If staff are too busy to do critical perspective, institutions should hire more staff. When staff cannot complete their tasks, the number of staff should be increased, and the critical perspective is one of the most important things for child welfare. Why do institutions not hire new staff? Because the wage of staffs is low. For example, this is the offer of a job by institutions. (以下、求人サイトindeed 参照)
Why is the wage low? This job is very important, because it saves the life of children who have problems. In spite of that, this job has low status. I think one of the reason is a lack of professionalism. If anyone can work in a job, employers will not pay high wages to do it.
5.Conclusion
After all, the change of current situation need more staff. And that needs more money. I think one of the solutions is improving specialized expertise. If staff in institutions improve specialized expertise, hiring the staff will require more money. The social position of staff in institutions should be raised. For this purpose, government should set the license strictly. The government and ourselves should understand the weak situation of social care in Japan.
[1] 厚生労働省 『児童相談所での児童虐待相談対応件数とその推移』2017
[2] 小木曽 宏・宮本秀樹・鈴木崇之 2007 『よくわかる養護内容・自立支援』pp.５９
6. References
小木曽 宏・宮本秀樹・鈴木崇之 2007 『よくわかる養護内容・自立支援』
北川清一 2010 『児童養護施設のソーシャルワークと家族支援 ケース管理のシステム化とアセスメントの方法』
厚生労働省 2017 『児童相談所での児童虐待相談対応件数とその推移』
厚生労働省雇用均等・児童家庭局家庭福祉課 2009 『国連総会採択決議 64/142. 児童の代替的養護に関する指針』
厚生労働省 2018（閲覧日） 『里親制度等について』