Social Welfare

The Relief Act of 1929 replaced the Relief Regulations of 1874 and set out a duty of public assistance under the responsibility of the state. The Relief Regulations (1874) provided charitable benefits to poor people. The (old) Public Assistance Act was enacted in 1946, after the war, and the Relief Act was abolished at that time. The Social Welfare Services Act (1951) created social welfare corporations and welfare offices. The Commissioned Welfare Volunteers Act (1948) is about welfare volunteers (minsei-iin), not public assistance.

The three welfare laws are those made soon after the war: the Public Assistance Act (生活保護法; old act 1946, new act 1950), the Child Welfare Act (児童福祉法, 1947) and the Act on Welfare of Persons with Physical Disabilities (身体障害者福祉法, 1949). The Act on Social Welfare for the Elderly (1963), the Mother and Child Welfare Act (1964) and the law that became the Act on Welfare of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities (1960) came in the early 1960s and, added to the three, made the "six welfare laws". The Social Welfare Services Act (1951) set the common base for all social welfare services and is counted in neither group.

The six welfare laws are the three welfare laws plus the 1960 law (now the Act on Welfare of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities), the Act on Social Welfare for the Elderly (1963) and the Mother and Child Welfare Act (1964; now the Act on Welfare of Mothers with Dependents, Fathers with Dependents and Widows). The Long-Term Care Insurance Act is a social insurance law that took effect in 2000 and is not one of the six. The Social Welfare Services Act (1951) is the common base law and is not counted. The Commissioned Welfare Volunteers Act is about the welfare volunteer system and is not one of the six.

The Social Welfare Services Act (1951) made clear the relationship between public and private services and created social welfare corporations and welfare offices. In the Basic Structural Reform of Social Welfare in 2000, its title was changed to the Social Welfare Act (社会福祉法). The Certified Social Workers and Certified Care Workers Act is a 1987 qualification law. The Relief Act is a 1929 public assistance law that was abolished in 1946. The Act on Welfare of Persons with Physical Disabilities is from 1949 and its title has not changed. The Act on Self-Reliance Support for Needy Persons is from 2013.

The New Poor Law enforced the principle of less eligibility and the principle of giving no relief outside the workhouse. Normalization is an idea that spread in the late 20th century: making it possible for people with disabilities to live as members of the local community. Non-discrimination and equality, the household as the unit, and meeting actual needs are principles of Japan's Public Assistance Act (生活保護法, 1950): anyone who meets the requirements can receive assistance equally, assistance is decided per household, and differences in the actual needs of each person or household are taken into account.

Booth surveyed London from 1886 and showed that about 30% of residents were living in poverty. Rowntree surveyed York in 1899. The option that swaps the cities is wrong. The Beveridge Report was in 1942 and the Elizabethan Poor Law in 1601, so the times do not match. Booth's survey showed that poverty was widespread, so "almost no one" is the opposite. Bismarck's social insurance (such as the Sickness Insurance Act of 1883) was a German system unrelated to Rowntree's survey.

Toynbee Hall was opened in December 1884 by Samuel and Henrietta Barnett in Whitechapel, in the East End of London. Hull-House was founded in 1889 in Chicago by Jane Addams and Ellen Gates Starr. Toynbee Hall was a private initiative, long before the Beveridge Report (1942). Hull-House is in Chicago, USA, not York. In a settlement, helpers live in a poor area and work with residents to improve their lives, which is the opposite of gathering people into workhouses.

Under Bismarck, the Sickness Insurance Act (1883), the Workers' Accident Insurance Act (1884) and the Old Age and Disability Insurance Act (1889) were enacted; these are considered the world's first social insurance systems by law. The US Social Security Act was enacted in 1935 as part of the New Deal response to the Great Depression. The Beveridge Report was a 1942 report, not a summary of the New Poor Law. "From the cradle to the grave" is the slogan linked to the Beveridge Report. The first social insurance was in Germany, about 50 years before the US Social Security Act.

Article 3 says that welfare services must be based on preserving the dignity of the individual, and must be good-quality, appropriate services that support users to grow up healthy in body and mind, or to lead an independent daily life according to their abilities. Priority of family support relates to the "supplementary nature of assistance" in the Public Assistance Act (Article 4), not to Article 3 of the Social Welfare Act. Protection by administrative placement is the idea of the system before the move to a user-choice system in the 2000 reform. Strict self-responsibility and securing operators' profits are not in Article 3.

Article 2(2) of the Social Welfare Act lists running infant homes, maternal and child living support facilities, children's homes, residential facilities for children with disabilities, psychological treatment facilities for children, and children's self-reliance support facilities under the Child Welfare Act as Type 1 services. All of these are residential facilities where children live. Nursery centers, children's recreational facilities (such as children's halls) and community child-rearing support centers are Type 2 services under Article 2(3).

Article 2(3)(ii) of the Social Welfare Act lists running midwifery facilities, nursery centers, children's recreational facilities and child and family support centers under the Child Welfare Act as Type 2 services. Type 1 services are residential facilities such as infant homes and children's homes. Nursery centers are a social welfare service, so "not included" is wrong. Only Community Chest associations can carry out the Community Chest fundraising (Article 113). Nursery centers are run not only by national and local governments but also by social welfare corporations and others.

Article 60 says Type 1 social welfare services shall, as a rule, be run by the national government, local governments or social welfare corporations. Because these services, such as residential facilities, have a large effect on users, the operators are limited. There is no rule limiting them to prefectures only. For-profit corporations are not among the operators in the rule. Welfare volunteers give advice in the community and do not run services. Councils of social welfare promote community welfare, and there is no rule that only they may run Type 1 services.

Article 14 of the Social Welfare Act says that prefectures and cities (including special wards) must set up welfare offices by ordinance, and towns and villages may set them up by ordinance (optional). A prefectural welfare office covers areas other than cities and towns/villages that have their own offices. There is no rule that municipalities cannot set them up, nor that prefectures do not. They are not national government bodies. The option that swaps the duties of towns/villages and cities is also wrong.

560 − 240 = 320 households above 240. 320 ÷ 80 = 4, so 3 + 4 = 7. Five or six counts too few increases; eight or nine is too many. This is a "standard"; the actual number of staff is set by ordinance. Prefectures (6 for up to 390 households, plus 1 per 65) and towns/villages (2 for up to 160, plus 1 per 80) have different standards, so check which one the question asks about.

Article 48 of the Certified Social Workers and Certified Care Workers Act (社会福祉士及び介護福祉士法) forbids anyone who is not a certified social worker from using that title (title protection). People without the qualification are not banned from doing advice work, so it is not an exclusive-practice qualification. The legal basis is not the Child Welfare Act but the 1987 Certified Social Workers and Certified Care Workers Act (the Child Welfare Act covers nursery teachers). Those commissioned by the Minister on the governor's recommendation are welfare volunteers (民生委員). 2000 is the year the Social Welfare Services Act became the Social Welfare Act; the qualification was created earlier.

Article 18-22 of the Child Welfare Act imposes a duty of confidentiality on nursery teachers and says "the same applies after ceasing to be a nursery teacher", so "only while working" is wrong. Article 18-23 forbids anyone who is not a nursery teacher from using that title or a confusingly similar one (title protection); simply working at a nursery center does not allow it. The qualification is set out in the Child Welfare Act, not in the Certified Social Workers and Certified Care Workers Act.

Article 1 of the Social Welfare Act says it sets basic matters common to all fields of social welfare services and, together with other laws, aims to protect the interests of welfare service users and promote community welfare, and to ensure fair and proper operation of social welfare services. Guaranteeing a minimum standard of living and helping self-reliance is the purpose in Article 1 of the Public Assistance Act. Standards for child welfare facilities are in a separate ministerial ordinance. Eliminating disability discrimination is the purpose of the Act for Eliminating Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities. Qualifications are set by the Certified Social Workers and Certified Care Workers Act.

Article 8(2) says that when a person with a disability expresses a need for removal of a social barrier and the burden is not excessive, a business must provide necessary and reasonable accommodation. With the amended act in force from 1 April 2024, reasonable accommodation became a legal duty for businesses too. So "only government bodies" is wrong. Because of the condition "when the burden is not excessive", "no matter how heavy" is wrong. Unfair discriminatory treatment is prohibited by Article 8(1), and accommodation does not excuse it. There is no system of yearly reports.

The recommendation explained that against causes of hardship such as illness, injury, childbirth, disability, death, old age, unemployment and having many children, economic security is provided by insurance methods or directly at public expense; people in need are guaranteed a minimum standard of living by state assistance; and public health and social welfare are improved. It assumes state involvement, so "without the state" is wrong. It includes "insurance methods" (social insurance), so it is not only public assistance. Unemployment and many children are among the causes, so it is not only for older people. It is not based on private insurance products.

Under Article 7 of the National Pension Act (国民年金法), Category 3 insured persons are spouses of Category 2 insured persons who are mainly supported by that person's income and are aged 20 or over and under 60. Category 1 is aged 20 to under 60, not 18 to under 65. Category 2 is people insured under the Employees' Pension Insurance (company employees, public servants, etc.); self-employed people are usually Category 1. People insured under the Employees' Pension Insurance are Category 2, not 3. Students in Japan aged 20 or over become Category 1 if they are not Category 2 or 3.

Under Article 9 of the Long-Term Care Insurance Act, Category 1 is people with an address in the municipality aged 65 or over, and Category 2 is those aged 40 or over and under 65 who are enrolled in health insurance. 65 and over is the definition of Category 1. People aged 20 to under 40 are not insured under long-term care insurance. Being insured depends on age and address, not on whether one has been certified as needing care. Being in the Employees' Pension Insurance has nothing to do with the categories of long-term care insurance.

Articles 1 to 4 of the Public Assistance Act are the basic principles (state responsibility, non-discrimination and equality, minimum standard of living, and the supplementary nature of assistance), and Article 5 says the act must be interpreted and applied on the basis of these principles. Assistance upon application (Article 7), the household as the unit (Article 10) and meeting actual needs (Article 9) are "principles of assistance" (保護の原則) in Chapter 2, not basic principles. Remember: Articles 1–4 are the basic principles; Articles 7–10 are the principles of assistance.

Article 7 says assistance starts on application by the person in need, a person with a duty of support, or another relative living with them, and its proviso says that if the person is in an urgent situation, necessary assistance can be given without an application. Persons with a duty of support and relatives living together can also apply, so "only the person" is wrong. Because of the urgency exception, "cannot without an application" is wrong. The rule is to start on application, so "no application procedure" is wrong. There is no rule that applications must go through a welfare volunteer.

Article 4 makes it a requirement that people use their available assets, abilities and everything else to maintain a minimum standard of living (para. 1), and says that support by persons with a duty of support and assistance under other laws take priority (para. 2). Assets must be "used", but there is no rule to donate them to the state. Other laws take priority, so "public assistance first" is the reverse. Using one's ability is a requirement, but there is no rule saying "never under any circumstances". Paragraph 3 says that in urgent cases, the necessary assistance may still be given.

Article 11 lists eight types: livelihood, educational, housing, medical, long-term care, maternity, occupational and funeral assistance. Educational and occupational assistance are among them. There are no types called childcare assistance, job-seeking assistance or child-rearing assistance ("things needed for working" are included in occupational assistance under Article 17, so do not confuse similar names).

Article 34 says medical assistance shall be provided in kind. Livelihood assistance is, as a rule, given in the recipient's home (Article 30); facility admission is for cases where home is difficult. Assistance is, as a rule, decided per household (Article 10); per individual is the exception. The national government bears three quarters of assistance costs (Article 75). The implementing bodies are prefectural governors, city mayors, and mayors of towns/villages that run welfare offices (Article 19).

Article 5 says prefectures and others shall carry out the self-reliance consultation support project (the work can be outsourced). "Needy persons" in this act are people who are currently in economic hardship and "at risk" of being unable to maintain a minimum standard of living because of their work situation, physical or mental condition, relations with the community and so on (Article 3). The act supports people before they reach public assistance, so "only recipients" and "only those below the standard" are wrong. It was enacted in 2013 (Heisei 25), not 1950. The project is carried out under the responsibility of prefectures and others.

The global definition describes social work as a practice-based profession and an academic discipline that promotes social change and development, social cohesion, and the empowerment and liberation of people, and says that principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility and respect for diversities are central. Because it is "a profession and an academic discipline", the volunteer-charity option is wrong. It engages people and "structures", so "does not engage structures" is wrong. Its foundations include indigenous (local and ethnic) knowledge. It also says the definition may be amplified at national and/or regional levels.

Understanding each person as "that person" and working in a way that fits them is individualization. Acceptance is receiving users as they are; a non-judgmental attitude means the helper does not one-sidedly judge good or bad; self-determination means supporting users to decide for themselves and respecting their decisions; confidentiality means keeping secrets learned in consultation. None of these matches the description.

Controlled emotional involvement means the helper is aware of their own feelings, judges and controls them, and then works with the user. Encouraging users to express feelings freely is "purposeful expression of feelings". Responding without feelings in a businesslike way is not what is required. Being caught up in the user's feelings means the helper is not controlling their emotions. Limiting the user's expression of feelings goes against the principle of purposeful expression of feelings.

Biestek's seven principles are individualization, purposeful expression of feelings, controlled emotional involvement, acceptance, non-judgmental attitude, client self-determination and confidentiality. Acceptance and confidentiality are among them. Self-responsibility is not one of them (do not confuse it with self-determination). Thorough instruction does not fit the idea of respecting users' own decisions. Generalization is the opposite of individualization, which means understanding each person individually.

The first interview (intake) hears the main concern; assessment gathers information and analyzes the issues; a plan is made based on it (planning); support is given (intervention); progress is checked (monitoring); results are evaluated (evaluation); and the case ends (termination). The key points are intake before assessment, assessment before planning, and monitoring after intervention. The other orders break this, for example planning before analysis, intervening before planning, or ending before evaluation.

An ecomap puts the person at the center, connects family, related people and social resources with lines, and shows strong, weak or conflicting relations by the thickness or type of line. Relations with social resources are shown in an ecomap, not a genogram. Family relations over three or more generations are shown in a genogram (generation diagram). In a genogram, females are generally ○ and males □, so the option is reversed. Both diagrams help understand the user's situation, not the helper's own family.

A Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare council document lists casework and group work as direct methods, and community work, social work research, social administration, social planning and social action as indirect methods. Casework and group work deal directly with the person or group, so they are direct methods. One-to-one interviews during home visits are also a way of working directly with the person.

A question without a fixed way of answering is an open question. It lets the person speak freely in their own words, so it is good for learning broadly about feelings and situations. A question with a fixed answer such as "yes" or "no" is a closed question, suited to checking facts briefly. Choosing between two answers also has a fixed format, so it is not open. The helper's words are a question, not advice expressing their opinion.

Under the principle of self-determination, the helper does not decide the answer but gives information so the user can decide, and respects that decision. Pushing a conclusion goes against self-determination. Ignoring the hesitation and giving only other families' examples also goes against individualization and acceptance. Talking about it at a parents' meeting without consent breaks confidentiality and the nursery teacher's duty of confidentiality (Child Welfare Act, Article 18-22). Blaming the parent goes against a non-judgmental attitude and acceptance.

The guidelines say third-party committee members are placed to ensure neutrality and objectivity in complaint resolution. Examples include councilors (not directors), auditors, certified social workers, welfare/child volunteers and lawyers, and having more than one is desirable. The complaint intake officer is a staff member who receives, records and reports complaints. The person responsible is the facility head or a director. The Operation Appropriateness Committee is set up in the prefectural council of social welfare, not inside the provider. The recommendation committee is a municipal body that recommends welfare volunteers.

Article 83 says the committee is set up in the prefectural council of social welfare to ensure proper operation of welfare service use support projects and to resolve users' complaints about welfare services appropriately. It is not a municipal body and does not decide nursery placements. It is not in the Ministry, and it is not the "only" window, since providers themselves also receive complaints. What is set up inside a facility is the system of a responsible person, intake officer and third-party members. Adult guardians are chosen by family court rulings.

Under Article 85, on receiving a complaint, the committee consults, gives necessary advice and investigates the circumstances, and with the consent of both the complainant and the provider it may mediate. Under Article 86, if it finds that improper acts may be occurring in the treatment of users, it must promptly notify the prefectural governor. There is no rule allowing the committee to impose fines, and no rule that complaints must first go through third-party members. Investigating circumstances is one of the responses in Article 85, so "does not investigate" is wrong.

Under Article 36-2 of the Standards for Equipment and Operation of Child Welfare Facilities (児童福祉施設の設備及び運営に関する基準), a nursery center must evaluate itself and keep improving (para. 1), and must make efforts to receive regular evaluation by outsiders and publish the results (para. 2). So "outside evaluation every year required, self-evaluation not required" is the reverse. Under Article 24-3, infant homes must receive regular outside evaluation and publish the results. Article 78(2) of the Social Welfare Act says the state shall make efforts to support fair and appropriate evaluation. Article 78(1) asks operators to evaluate their own service quality, so "prohibited" is wrong.

The project supports people with insufficient decision-making capacity, such as older people with dementia and people with intellectual or mental disabilities, to live independently in the community. Based on a contract with the user, it helps with using welfare services and with everyday money management such as bank withdrawals. It is run by councils of social welfare of prefectures and designated cities, with municipal councils as contact points. Adult guardianship, not this project, starts with a family court ruling. Because it is contract-based, users must be able to understand the contract, so "no capacity at all" is wrong. Fees are set by the operator and paid by users (free for households on public assistance).

Article 15(2) of the Civil Code (民法) says that to start assistance on the request of someone other than the person, the person's consent is needed. Article 3 of the Act on Voluntary Guardianship Contracts says such contracts must be made by a notarial deed in the form set by Ministry of Justice ordinance. Rulings are made by the family court, not mayors. "Constantly lacking" capacity is for guardianship (Article 7); curatorship (Article 11) is for people whose capacity is "extremely insufficient". A notarial deed is required, so a verbal promise alone is not enough.

Under Article 5 of the Commissioned Welfare Volunteers Act, they are commissioned by the Minister on the governor's recommendation (the governor recommends people put forward by the municipal recommendation committee). Under Article 10, they receive no salary and serve three years. They are not full-time public servants appointed by mayors. Under Article 16 of the Child Welfare Act, welfare volunteers are deemed to serve as child welfare volunteers (児童委員), so "cannot" is wrong. Being a certified social worker is not required. Article 15 requires them to respect each person and keep personal secrets.

Under Article 107, municipalities shall make efforts to draw up a municipal community welfare plan setting out matters for promoting community welfare as a whole, make efforts to reflect residents' opinions, and make efforts to publish it. Under Article 108, prefectures are likewise to make efforts to draw up prefectural support plans. They are not national plans. Because municipalities should reflect opinions and publish, "must not" is the reverse. The plans include matters common to the welfare of older people, people with disabilities, children and others, so not only child welfare. They are made by municipalities and prefectures, not councils of social welfare.

Article 112 defines the Community Chest as a collection of donations made widely, per prefecture, once a year, only during the period set by the Minister, distributed to operators of social welfare services in the area (excluding national and local governments) to promote community welfare. "Per municipality, at any time" is wrong. National and local governments are excluded from distribution. Under Article 113, only Community Chest associations may carry it out, and it is a Type 1 social welfare service.