ABSTRACT
Novel coronavirus infection（COVID-19）is having a significant impact on diverse areas of society. We investigated the features of Japan's policies from the perspective of analogies used in social welfare policy and policy science. The results revealed that Japan's statistics do not represent reality； the government is unable to respond with world-class policies； the system is maintained through excessive workloads in the workplace； local governments adopt different directions to national policy； non-experts are confusing society； and other areas are affected due to the inability to implement concentrated investment and support. If we apply these findings to the current COVID-19 response, there are problems including statistical issues, an inability to respond with world-class policies, confusion of policy objectives and means of implementation, increased public opinion guidance that disregards human life, and the inability to adopt optimal measures due to a lack of resources, which worsened the situation and affected other areas. Therefore, it is presumed that insufficient care and compensation to individuals adversely affected by the social effects of COVID-19 would delay economic and social recovery. Accordingly, as a future response, we will present policies including establishment of a crisis management organization, accumulation of experience, and implementation of suitable statistical information to deal with infectious diseases that exceed a certain disaster level. We also recommend that preparations be implemented during normal times, rather than waiting until a crisis has occurred, and a system for finding and supporting people who have suffered due to these events should also be considered. All these issues can be resolved by politics. In other words, all of Japan's problems can be said to converge on the political arena； hence, it is predicted that the current society that excessively burdens its citizens will persist for a long time unless suitable policies are implemented through the political process.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND@#Building an effective casework system for child maltreatment is a global issue. We estimated the effect of household dysfunction (i.e., interparental violence, caregiver mental health problems, and caregiver substance abuse) on child maltreatment to understand how to advance the current framework of child welfare.@*METHODS@#The sample comprised 759 children (1- to 17-year-old; mean age was 10.6; 404 boys and 355 girls) placed in temporary custody units (one of the strongest intervention of the Japanese child protection system). Caseworkers from 180 units across 43 prefectures completed questionnaires on children and their family and were asked whether a child maltreatment report had been made after cancelation of custody in a 15-month follow-up period. The relations of household dysfunction and maltreatment reports were assessed using the Cox proportional hazard model.@*RESULTS@#About half (48.4%) of the children had been placed in the unit because of maltreatment, and 88.3% had a history of victimization. Seventy-six cases had maltreatment reports after cancelation. We entered household dysfunction variables individually into the model, and each had a significant relationship with maltreatment reports (hazard ratios for interparental violence, caregiver mental health problem, and substance abuse were 1.69, 1.69, and 2.19, respectively) after covariate adjustment. When treating these three variables as cumulative risk score model of household dysfunction, the hazard ratio increased with increasing number of score (1.96 for score two; 2.35 for score three; score 0 as reference).@*CONCLUSIONS@#Greater household dysfunction score is a risk of maltreatment after intensive intervention. It is imperative to construct systems facilitating cooperation between child and adult service sectors and to deliver seamless services to children and families. Our findings provide child protect services with risk-stratified interventions for children at victimization risk and promote adult-focused services to be proactive in prevention or intervention for adults with perpetration risk.