|Budget Amount *help
¥1,900,000 (Direct Cost : ¥1,900,000)
Fiscal Year 2004 : ¥600,000 (Direct Cost : ¥600,000)
Fiscal Year 2003 : ¥1,300,000 (Direct Cost : ¥1,300,000)
In Japan, the social welfare system is now under the improvement process called "fundamental structure reform" along with The Government Action Plan for Persons with Disabilities : A Seven-Year Strategy to Achieve Normalization". We examined three points as the following to promote the independence of the intellectually disabilities.
1. Human rights of the intellectually disabilities. Handling of the intellectual disabilities in the new adulthood guardianship system was examined. In this system, the procedure for the judgment of competency is prepared. But, as for the right to consent or reject medical treatments, any clear standards were not shown. So, we reviewed judgments about the right of the minors to consent or reject medical treatments in England. The minors in England have the right to consent to medical treatment, but not the right to reject it for him/herself. Such different judgments were criticized as double-standard.
2. The information disclosure of the welfare facilities.
To respect the decision of the disabled and to establish the equal relationship between the service providers and users, the information disclosure of the welfare facilities is needed. Recently, many nursery school and care service facilities for the elderly were taken evaluation by the third party and disclosed its result. But, as for the facilities for intellectual disabilities, a new system for the user to select services based on the disclosed information has not been fully effective.
3. Opinions and attitudes on human rights of the disabilities. In the reformed welfare system, service providers in facilities must have the attitude to respect human rights of the disabled. Especially, it is required for them to respect users' autonomy and to promote their self-determination. But, a paternalistic attitude was conventionally prevailing in them. So, we developed a scale to measure individual differences in beliefs in justifying paternalistic interventions, using a task making decisions about a dilemma situation similar to DIT. Less