NHK Newswatch 9 on Koreans and Indonesians

Share

Tonight on NHK Newswatch 9 there was not one, but two back-to-back stories on foreigners in Japan. The first looked at the older group, the Zainichi voting for the first time in the upcoming Korean election. They focused on two people, one an 87 year old who came over before the war and joined (or was enlisted into) the Japanese army. However, due to the section he was in (I didn’t quite catch which – perhaps he was stationed in Korea?) if he had returned back home he would have been guilty of war crimes. James at Japan Probe had a story from a while back about how Korea to this day treats those they judge traitors – here it is.

Second was a look at Indonesian nurses; just recently we read an article telling us how 95% fail the exam and they are just exploited as cheap labour. However, this year about 38% passed (the newly-introduced version with furigana over all kanji), a bit over half the rate of native Japanese. We visited a couple of people working in Yamanashi, where the manager of the old folks’ home that they worked in was quoted as saying that a three year internship costs the company about 8 million yen per person over the three years to provide a dormitory, translator services, training, etc, yet they only get about a tenth of that back from the government, thus hiring foreign labour puts a serious strain on the budget, but without foreign staff they’d probably have to close as they cannot find Japanese willing to work there. That doesn’t seem like a very profitable way to exploit people.

In the same segment they visited Yokohama City, one of the few places being proactive in getting the nurses through the test. There the city provides a number of free extras, including a six-month weekend juku studying how to pass the exam. That seems like someone is throwing a wedge into the revolving door.

Anyway, congratulations to the newly-qualified Japanese nurses (both native and immigrant) and best of luck for the future in your vocation!

PS: If you saw the same news stories, please feel free to correct any errors I might have made above.

Leave a comment

78 Comments.

  1. @Level3:

    My first thought too was that he’ll have had these checks himself yearly (he’ll have had the barium meal too, which you don’t forget so easily), so he knows what the deal is. He’s completely lost the plot. It’s almost worth sending him made-up stories to see what he’ll believe. (On the other hand, Poe’s law suggests it might not stay restricted to his site. Hell, this story might have been sent in as a wind-up.)

    By the by, Arudou refers to police drug testing for “tits and giggles”. “Tits and giggles” is the name of a personal blog by a sexually experimental Californian. The correct phrase, Grandad, is “shits and giggles.” :roll:

  2. Re: Naha health check ups.

    :shock: :facepalm: :headdesk:

    Good lord. I seriously can’t believe he is seriously putting that forth as an attempt at discriminatory practices. Has he been out of work for so long that he doesn’t recall his mandated health check ups or know that ALL new hires (Japanese or otherwise) are REQUIRED to have a health checkup before employment is officially granted?

    Seriously, one can only assume that he is trolling the FOBs in an effort to keep them away from Japan. He could have done a LOT of good by providing real and accurate advice about the LEGAL Health checkup requirement. Instead, he blows it (again) and tries to create a world to fit his own vindictive and malicious agenda.

    Debito, you REALLY need to quit blogging. Your site is about 3 posts away from a complete cesspool of mis-information. It is already 30 posts BEYOND a cesspool of hate.

  3. Ken. The urine test story deserves a new post. Chop chop.

  4. Tony in Saitama

    @The Chrysanthemum Sniffer:

    Suggested title; “Taking the piss?”

    I must admit I would like to be a fly on the wall when some oversuspecting JET gives some unsuspecting administrator a cup of urine instead of their health check report. :twisted:

    Come to think of it, they want “Blood Pressure, X-Ray, Urinalysis”, so he should have to give in a pint of blood and a few bones as well…

    @Level3:

    ” and I’m pretty sure the 4 colored test strips are not for cocaine, heroin, THC and speed.”

    So they DO check for Weed!!!! :shock: :lol:

  5. @Tony in Saitama: Come on guys, you’ve already covered just about every angle already, including the title I had in mind! Ohh, let’s just do it for the tits and giggles regardless! :facepalm:

  6. “it is hard to imagine for a native Japanese journalist to have the confused ideas about a nurse and a caregiver like non-Japanese who are not familiar with the system.”

    Perhaps if you knew more about the origin and usage of the term 介護福祉士 (or 介護士)you wouldn’t find it hard to imagine at all.

    Here’s an exercise you can conduct on your own. Stand outside your local care home, and ask passers-by who they think works inside. Some people will tell you 看護婦 (kangofu). If the place happens to call itself a ナーシングホーム (nursing home), others might be prompted to say ナース (nurse). You’ll probably also hear 看護士 or 看護師 (kangoshi). Only a small number, if any, will answer 介護福祉士 (kaigo fukushishi)or 介護士 (kaigoshi).

    Of course, depending on the nature of the home, nurses will be working there too, perhaps even making up a majority if the institution leans primarily towards medical care. However, most rely on caregivers.

    No caregiver will complain about being called a nurse. The only problem they occasionally confront is when neighbours stop by asking them if they’d mind having a quick look at little Taro who seems to have a temperature.

    介護 as a term has been around over a hundred years but it’s specific usage to refer to care work is more recent. Even then, carers weren’t called 介護士 (and no-one ever thought of calling them 介護婦). If you are old enough to have seen Taiho on TV, and grew up listening to Golden Hafu, perhaps you’ll remember what they were more commonly called. Or not.

    The term 介護福祉士 only really came into the language formally with the introduction of state exams in 1987. The public nursing care insurance scheme (介護保険) has only been around since 2000.

    I suspect the reason you got on your high horse is that you assumed my observation about the newspaper reports was somehow accusing journalists of lacking Japanese proficiency. It’s not a language proficiency issue at all. It’s a general knowledge issue.

    That’s probably also why you describe your own confusion above as “a typo”. I don’t doubt that you know exactly what the terms do mean, and have no proficiency issues, but I see your mistake very often. After all, 看護士 and 介護士 are quite similar; someone meaning to write the second might easily come up with first just as you did. 介護士 just isn’t hard-wired into the consciousness as strongly as 看護士 for people who don’t know about the sector.

    Of course, anyone writing about nurses rarely uses 看護士 anymore, they use 看護師. You did in your initial question to me, which gives a further insight into how you made that earlier mistake.

    It wasn’t however, the error I recall seeing. The reports I saw referred to 看護師 and didn’t mention 介護福祉士. There were several groups of EPA candidates who made it up to Tohoku and some were comprised only of nurses so the description was correct in those cases.

    Your confidence in Japanese journalists is touching but it’s quite something to assume all the hacks on duty to write up a feelgood story about volunteers to the disaster zone – quite a low key assignment – would be familiar with the structure of Japan’s healthcare system. Especially, when a large part of the population isn’t really up to speed with it.

    Anyone following the development of the EPA scheme would know that it includes both nursing and caregiver candidates from Indonesia and the Philippines. If, however, you were just following the headlines about the state exam results, then you’d very likely only be aware of the nurses. The caregivers only took their exam this year.

    Whoever wrote the reports probably just didn’t know there were caregivers on the scheme and didn’t pay attention to the meishi. In that sense, the slip was of a similar order to Ken’s.

    A very small percentage of the population even knows that you can only take the exam for 介護福祉士 after three years of work experience. Most people call carers ホームヘルパー, 介護ヘルパー or just ヘルパー. You don’t need such stringent qualifications for those roles, so that actually does a disservice to 介護福祉士, another reason why being called a nurse draws little complaint.

    Consequently, I wasn’t surprised at all that some reports on the volunteers assumed the visitors were all 看護師. It wasn’t a major mistake. It certainly didn’t upset the visitors who were just delighted to get very supportive coverage when they hadn’t gone up expecting any.

  7. @Justin Thyme:

    Here’s an exercise you can conduct on your own. Stand outside your local care home,…..

    Did you read what I wrote?

    日本人が混同することがないわけではない。
    例えば病院や老人ホームで働いている人が、介護師であっても看護師と思う場合もあるし、その逆もあるでしょう。
    しかし、日本人の記者が、外国人のように、概念的に区別していないというのは考えにくい、ということです。
    It is possible someone takes a woman working at the hospital as a nurse while in truth she is a caregiver, but it is hard to imagine for a native Japanese journalist to have the confused ideas about a nurse and a caregiver like non-Japanese who are not familiar with the system.

    Even then, carers weren’t called 介護士 (and no-one ever thought of calling them 介護婦). If you are old enough to have seen Taiho on TV, and grew up listening to Golden Hafu, perhaps you’ll remember what they were more commonly called. Or not.

    Acutally there were no carer in the sense it is used now. The members of the family were supposed to take care of the older members.

    I suspect the reason you got on your high horse is that you assumed my observation about the newspaper reports was somehow accusing journalists of lacking Japanese proficiency

    You guess it wrong. All I am interested in was which article you are reading.

    It’s not a language proficiency issue at all.

    Of course.

    It’s a general knowledge issue.

    Right. And even Ken Y-N knew the nurse wear the uniform and such but Kaigoshi do not.

    The reports I saw referred to 看護師 and didn’t mention 介護福祉士.

    So which articles were you reading? That is what I am asking.

    Your confidence in Japanese journalists is touching but it’s quite something to assume all the hacks on duty to write up a feelgood story about volunteers to the disaster zone –

    I am quite critical of the ability of Japanese journalists but at the least I am confident , unlike the foreigners who are not familiar with the system, they are not conceptually confused about the difference between Kangoshi and Kaigoshi.

    記事は、要するに、外国人も助けてくれている、ありがたいな、という記事ですから、看護師”など”とかしている可能性はあるが、しかし、概念的に混乱してるということは考えにくい。

    Whoever wrote the reports probably just didn’t know there were caregivers on the scheme and didn’t pay attention to the meishi. In that sense, the slip was of a similar order to Ken’s.

    Just tell me which local newspaper are you reading?

    Yomiuri? Asahi? or what ?

    だから、この間もそうですけど、端的にお応えください。

    It does not have to be on the internet.

    どこの新聞社の記事ですか?

    正確な日時がわかればありがたいが、わからなくてもこの記事がでた時期というのは特定できますからアーカイブを図書館で、チェックすることができる。

    I am with Tetsu girl on this one.

    I have seen much more on this subject in J newspapers and TV than in the English (in Japan) media but all the mixed up reports I have seen were in English. Without going back to read it with a fine toothed comb, my impression was the author did not actually write anything that is incorrect but sort of jumped from one to the other without clear demarcation. I felt it would lead to confusion for those not already familiar with the system or too impatient to read extra carefully.

    http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120329a3.html
    Japan Times の記事でも、これ、間違っているわけではない。ただ、違いがわからない外国人が混乱したかもしれない、というだけである。

    そして、今回も、あたなが、記者が混乱していると、思い込んだだけかもしれない。

    And it is possible that you mistakenly assumed that the journalist was conceptually confused.

    And another question.

    It would mean allowing candidates to stay in Japan for five years. While not common, it’s possible to get PR in five years and some want reassurance that failed candidates won’t have that route opened to them.
    These candidates, both men and women, are also mostly in their early 20s. If the scheme ends up granting a stay of five years, there’s a higher chance that some will form relationships here, and may even get married, which is another route to residency.
    Dissenters point out that, of the 27 nursing exam candidates who were granted an additional year to take the exam after failing it three times, only 8 passed on their fourth attempt. They suggest that some more vigorous screening might be necessary before approving any extensions.

    Where did you find these dissenting views?

    I’ve found パブリックコメント
    http://search.e-gov.go.jp/servlet/Public?CLASSNAME=PCMMSTDETAIL&id=495110062&Mode=2

    Yes, there are dissenting views but they were nothing like the ones you mentioned.

    I am curious you just imagined there was such a dissenting view or you actually came across the dissenting view you mentioned. If the latter, where and who was it?

    また、長くなると嫌なので、端的に

    外国人ボランティア記事について、

    1)どこの新聞社の(できれば、いつの)記事なのか?

    反対意見について

    2)どこの誰が言ったのか?
    3)5年以内にPRが取れる制度とは何を指しているのか?

    この3点についてお応えください。

  8. “Actually there were no carer in the sense it is used now. The members of the family were supposed to take care of the older members.”

    That’s quite an extraordinary statement to make. What do you think used to happen to the elderly when families were unwilling, or unable, to look after them? Do you think they were all just thrown off cliffs?

    It’s a shame you weren’t around to advise the government when they passed the 1963 Welfare Law for the Elderly (老人福祉法) which specifically sanctioned the establishment of 老人福祉施設 such as 養護老人ホーム (yogos) and 特別養護老人ホーム (intensive care yogos). You could have explained that was no need, because families had this base covered and, moreover, there were no caregivers to work in them, and wouldn’t be until 1987.

    It’s not even as if the yogos were the first residential care facilities for the elderly either. Every society I know thinks families ought to take care of their elderly but, just as in Japan, circumstances mean that doesn’t always happen, so private, religious and charitable institutions step in until the government takes more formal measures.

    You ask how you might find out about the discussions surrounding policy towards the EPA candidates since your trusty googling hasn’t helped you. I suggest you start working in the sector, join a professional body, earn your stripes, and start attending meetings where these topics are aired.

    We’ve been following the progress of the EPA scheme since it was first thought up. It was actually a relatively late addition to the trade agreement. Within our industry, you’ll find that we are not particularly happy to find ourselves being used as a political football. These foreign candidates are under the auspices of the Health Ministry but the EPA as a whole is a trade agreement, not a dedicated medical or welfare policy.

    The nurses and caregivers were thrown into the mix as a sop to ease the passage of the whole deal. As it is, the Filipino nurses and caregivers arrived later than the Indonesians because the legislature there baulked at some of the terms of the agreement, specifically one which allowed Japan to export it’s industrial waste.

    What many on our side would like to see instead, is a specific policy towards bringing in nurses and caregivers from overseas. If there was a visa category for such people, institutions could bring over and train candidates they select themselves, from any country.

    As it stands, the media puts out data that the number of institutions accepting foreign trainees has declined from 177 to 62 as if we are somehow to blame. Someone like Debito would probably latch onto such figures, if he ever knew about them, and conclude that we are being racist. It’s a misrepresentation of what is happening on the ground.

    At a Ministry level, the EPA agreement involved METI, MoFA, MoJ and MHLW. Possibly others, but those are the main four. Opponents of the plan to bring over nurses and caregivers have a variety of motives. Some in the Ministry of Justice don’t particularly like linking any people movements to trade agreements. Some in METI and MoFA resent having to give ground on the matter and wouldn’t mind if the flow of applicants dried up. The MHLW feels burdened having to deal with the fallout of the scheme. Favouring a more dedicated policy, some are lukewarm about getting the EPA provisions to work.

    Likewise, supporters have differing motives. Some MoJ officials like having clear cut schemes for importing specialized labour because they are easy to administer. Others in METI and MoFA want the scheme to succeed to further facilitate trade. They would like to see more done to assist these canidates – so long as they don’t have to do it themselves. MHLW is piggy in the middle but one benefit of the plan is that it nudged the employment issue into the public arena. Some would like these candidates to succeed to show their value, and encourage the formulation of a more dedicated policy.

    When I mentioned earlier that some objected to the idea of inadequate EPA candidates being allowed to reside in Japan for five years, their motives were also varied. If you’ve set up a scheme to allow immigrants to meet specific employment criteria, then one school of thought wants specific guarantees on what happens to those who fail to meet them. They want any potential backdoors to residency closed, no matter how unlikely.

    Immigration policy does appear to be changing to make it easier for certain categories of foreign resident to gain PR. It has been pointed out that an unsuccessful caregiver candidate would probably have to discover a cure for cancer in her spare time, to warrant any expedited treatment, but it hasn’t stopped calls for reassurance on that point.

    Those concerns are probably rooted in early fears that the scheme would be used as a cover for unqualified immigrants to enter the country and seek to establish residency. The Philippines, in particular, was higlighted as a potential problem and, caregivers the category where qualification standards are more varied. The thinking seemed to be that candidates would flood in, seeking Japanese husbands or wives, without ever intending to contribute as intended.

    If you had paid attention, you will have noticed that one of the successful caregiver candidates this year was from the Philippines. That should have raised a flag, since they arrived one year after the Indonesians and so shouldn’t have sufficient work experience in Japan to take the exam. We don’t know for certain, but the obvious conclusion is that this person already had at least a year of experience from a previous stay in the country.

    It’s always said that, when you break residency in Japan, the counters reset to zero and any later application for PR, during a subsequent stay, will only consider your continuous residency at that point.

    That’s not strictly true. In cases of special merit, individuals have been granted PR with a stay of under 5 years where they also have an earlier residence history. Again, it’s hard to see how an unsuccesful caregiver candidate might warrant such treatment but the possibility has been raised.

    Others are unworried about such possibilities because they know most of these candidates can be a useful addition to society. However, they still want to be very strict about ensuring unsuccessful candidates return home. In short, they want to highlight the shortcomings of the EPA scheme to force a rethink on policy. I personally think they are cutting off their nose to spite their face but I understand their perspective.

    For similar reasons, such people also strongly object to any attempt to alter the exams to increase the pass rate, especially the proposal floated to let candidates have greater use of their mother tongue in the exam. I happen to agree with that thinking.

    You can’t skim the internet for access to these discussions. You also won’t find dissent in any of the published government committee papers on this scheme. That’s not how public policy works in Japan. Committees publish what they have agreed on and don’t have a habit of including a section for members to register objections.

    Interested parties learn about the nature of the discussions through both formal and informal feedback. This has the positive effect of reassuring people that their views were at least heard, if not acted upon. Our prism is obviously mainly the MHLW but we hear other views.

    When I speak to new employees, or new trainees, I always tell them “Don’t be afraid to say you don’t know”. You then look at their faces and can tell that’s the last thing on their mind. They don’t want to look incompetent or ill-informed so you’re resigned to dealing with issues which arise when they start guessing and getting it wrong.

    It’s a lesson you might want to bear in mind yourself.

    Surfing the internet in Japanese doesn’t make you an expert on all aspects of Japan. Nor can it take native Japanese from zero to a level achieved by foreigners with expertise and experience in their field.

    There’s an enormous contribution that native Japanese can make to discussions foreigners have among themselves about life in Japan. I’d go further and say it’s an essential part of such discussions. Without it, all you are left with is an echo chamber. However, those contributions can’t be made from a starting point of assuming superior knowledge and dismissing out of hand views which don’t tally with your own, necessarily partial, understanding of the world.

  9. @Justin Thyme:

    Justin、Greatgrandpa, Please just answer my questions.

    1)Which article of the newspaper was it that confused kangoshi with Kangoshi?

    2) How can you get PR within 5 years? Please specify which Japanese law allows it?

    3) Who said the dissenting view? Where did you get the information.

    These are things I asked in Japanese.

    Why are you always afraid of backing up your claim?

    ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

    “We’ve been following the progress….”

    “We” are nobody on the internet, so to provide the adequate and reliable information we need to provide the links, books, magazines that exist in reality so that anybody can check.

    You know 2 channel and the forums on the internet are filled with untrustworthy insider information

    Or just come forward and tell your real name.
    I’ll check your job and see if the work is worth trusting.
    (And we can also check if you have really a great-
    grand child.)

    The last time you failed to back up your claim and you admitted it was just of your subjective impression. How about this time, it is just your own subjective imagination?

    こっちは単純に確認させてくださいな、と言っているだけなわけです。

    1)どこの新聞社なのか?
    2)5年でPRをとれるという条文
    3)どこで、どういったところに所属する人、あるいは、だれが

    Dissenters point out that, of the 27 nursing exam candidates who were granted an additional year to take the exam after failing it three times, only 8 passed on their fourth attempt. They suggest that some more vigorous screening might be necessary before approving any extensions.

    と言っていたのか?

    No newspaper, no government document have reported such dissenting view as yours. Right?

    今回の外国人移民の受け入れに対する一般的な反対意見があることから、今回もこうした意見があるだろうと、あたなが推測したのか、それとも、どこかの政府委員会で、あなたが直接聞いたのか、どうなんですが?

    ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

    あなたにせよ、Meiさんにせよ、理不尽にまるで、やくざのように(motherfucker/ ponta などなど)私に因縁をつけて、執拗にad hominen attack を仕掛けてきた経緯がある。

    そう簡単に信頼されると思わないでいただきたい。

  10. Justin my lad, you are wasting your time. It does not matter what arguments or what evidence you trot out. The little yellow shit-for-brains you are trying to convince will never believe you.

    There is a simple reason for that: you are not Japanese. If you were, you could put up any old sign, and when he called you (assuming that he did, in fact, actually call you and wasn’t making that part of the story up as well) you could just tell him it was all a misunderstanding. Then, like George W. Bush standing on the deck of the Abraham Lincoln, he would declare “mission accomplished”.

    Don’t ask him for any proof he completed this feat of derring-do, or even to prove that the sign was indeed removed and/or the bar owner truly changed his ways. He won’t (can’t?) provide it.

    But question his way of looking at things, or challenge him on his repeated offensive behavior (such as calling people out based on the nationality of their spouse, or the treatment he gave Mark in Yayoi) and be prepared to be assulted by a barrage of off-topic English or, worse, Japanese. Demands of “proof” or “substantiation”, while demanding people speak Japanese – and when they do, he ignores the message and picks on their Japanese mistakes.

    I have no idea why Ken tolerates the little ‘tard, he should be permanently blacklisted since he is absolutely incapable of playing nicely with others.

  11. “little yellow shit-for-brain”

    I don’t have the time now to reply to the comments Sora has added. Whatever I think of his failings, however, there’s no place on a board dealing with issues of life in Japan for that kind of comment.

  12. Mei Nona referred to Sora as a
    “little yellow shit-for-brain”
    And Justin Thyme responded
    “Whatever I think of his failings, however, there’s no place on a board dealing with issues of life in Japan for that kind of comment.”

    I heartily second Justin’s comment and would take it further to add that that there is no place for it anywhere.

  13. @Justin Thyme:
    @Tetsugirl:

    Absolutely. That was really quite foul.

  14. Was that the “real” Mei Nona? Or a sockpuppet in another sockpuppet’s clothing?
    Looks like just another lame move in the debito fan club campaign to get tepido to start revealing IP addys and start banning people so the debito fans can scream “We won we won, tepido is teh hippocrit!!1!” while dancing around their laptops in their underwear.

    :roll:

  15. Sorry to intrude on this private spat, but on the subject of PR, the minimum residency requirement for the spouse of a Japanese national (or PR holder) appears to be 1yr.

    See 2(1):

    http://www.immi-moj.go.jp/english/tetuduki/zairyuu/guide_residence.html

  16. @Mei Nona:

    Anyway as for Mark in Yayoi, I still hold that
    1)Debito org is a hate blog
    2)A regular participant of the hate group like him should act and make remark carefully so that s/he may not be viewed as holding the same view as other bigots in the group.

    I am not sure what Mei means by calling people out based on the nationality of their spouse.

    But I hold that in general foreign nationals have less connections with the host country, so it is not unreasonable to leave the country in times of great disasters and there is more reason to leave the country if there are so many things they hate about the host country.

    If you want to argue against rationally, go ahead.
    If you want to call names, go ahead.

    Yes, I want people to speak and write in Japanese.
    Firstly because people on Debito org claim they are bilingual
    Secondly because Japanese is much easier for me to understand and write.
    Thirdly because I don’t think it is wrong to ask to communicate in Japanese in a Japan- related-forum whose members are residents or ex residents of Japan.

    In your case, it is you who started bragging your proficiency in Japanese. But miserably you failed the test.
    That is why you are angry.

    I pointed out your errors in Japanese because you said your Japanese was better than my Japanese. But it turned out your Japanese was just as bad as my English.

    Now as for you opinion in Japanese, I agreed with you that Kotaro was overgeneralizing from a few instances. It is just that you didn’t get what I said in Japanese.

    On the other hand you can’t state your opinion on Debito’s article or my criticism of it either in English or in Japanese. You just tried to ”revenge” by correcting my English but miserably failed because I (and lots of other Japanese) like my(our) English corrected anyway,

    From the start, you were nothing but emotional towards me. So there is nothing surprising about the little yellow shit-for-brain comment. I might be mother fucker and shit-for-brains but ” little yellow” is a derogatory term for Asians. The comment surely revealed your real attitude toward Asians.

  17. @Mei Nona: Regardless of how much 空 annoys you, that was way out of line. Apologise, or face sanctions.

    @Level3: I have reason to believe that that post is from the same Mei Nona – s/he is a proxy user, but other information suggests it’s the same person.

  18. I think it’s worth pointing out what your contribution has amounted to here so far.

    Firstly, you’ve repeated in Japanese the information I already posted in English. You appear to scan this site avidly, so I imagine we both saw Ken’s piece at the same time. The reason my comment appeared first is that I did not need to scour the web to make it: I knew what I was writing about without having to cram.

    Having duplicated my contribution, you then had to add a correction. Working in your native language, you used the wrong term and ended up making the same error as Ken.

    Despite having made that mistake, you then say it is “hard to imagine” a native Japanese journalist might make a similar slip. Given that you accept the entire Japanese population might not be familiar with all the details of this area, this seems to assume that all Japanese journalists, no matter what their beat, must have attended compulsory seminars educating them about the structure of Japan’s health and welfare policies, along with a comprehensive outline of the EPA scheme. They didn’t.

    You then said that no-one could have been filling the role of caregivers in the 60s and 70s because families were expected to look after the elderly. This is false, and a cursory knowledge of the history of welfare legislation in Japan would have helped you avoid embarrassing yourself with such a claim.

    A Japan which ignored the plight of it’s weakest elderly, and is populated by infallible journalists receiving instant software updates to their brain whenever something happens in the nation, is a country I don’t recognize.

    I’m glad I live instead in the Japan which did care enough about its weakest members to pass significant laws, licensing institutions to deal with them. And one in which journalists are human, and capable of making mistakes.

    You are right to think there is someone here, posting on this topic, who has a serious credibility problem. However, it’s certainly not me.

  19. @Justin Thyme:

    How very tiresome.

    The questions are simple enough if your story is true.

    Which newspaper confused Kangoshi with Kaigoshi if there was really such a newspaper?

    Which law grants the foreigners the status of PR in five years in such a way that some dissenting people are afraid the candidates permitted to stay for 5 years might abuse.?

    Where did you get the dissenting views no newspaper no government document reported.

    The reason you can’t answer makes sense if your story is just your imagination, your speculation, there is nothing to back up just as the last time about the word ” haafu”

    And let me ask you. Are you really greatgrandpa as you claim to be? Or is it just another imagination of yours?

    @James Annan:

    関連する箇所を引用しておきますと、

    there are dissenting views. It would mean allowing candidates to stay in Japan for five years. While not common, it’s possible to get PR in five years and some want reassurance that failed candidates won’t have that route opened to them.
    These candidates, both men and women, are also mostly in their early 20s. If the scheme ends up granting a stay of five years, there’s a higher chance that some will form relationships here, and may even get married, which is another route to residency.

    、配偶者の永住許可申請はnot common とはいえないわけで、この書き方からして、前段と後段ではちがう話をしていると考えたほうがいいんではないでしょうか?

    で、2(4)の「我が国への貢献」がある場合は、not common なわけです

    一般の方がこれに該当するケースはほとんどない

    が、ところが、しかし、これは5年以上滞在ですし、候補者が悪用できるようなものでもない。

    ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

    The followings are irrelevant to the topic. Justin さんにせよ、Meiさんにせよ、やれ、mother fucker だ、little yellow shit for brains だ、やれ、お前はポンタだ、おまえの動機は不純だ、など 論題と関係ない話をするのがお好きのようで……


    you then say it is “hard to imagine” a native Japanese journalist might make a similar slip.”

    Huh?
    Did Ken make a similar slip?
    Ken said,
    ” I hadn’t realised there was the two categories, nurses and caregivers,”

    Is this a similar slip that I made?

    Which newspaper made a similar slip anyway?

    You then said that no-one could have been filling the role of caregivers in the 60s and 70s because families were expected to look after the elderly.

    No I didn’t say that. I said, to quote,”there were no carer in the sense it is used now

    当時は、祖父母は家族で面倒をみるというのが当然と思われており、現在あるような、ヘルパーや介護というのはなかったわけです。

     裕福の家には、お手伝いさんや家政婦さんを自宅で雇っていた人はいたでしょうが、例えばの話、私の父の母、つまり、祖母は母親が面倒をみた。それは非常に一般的なありかただったわけです。
     その祖母が入院すれば、そこにいたのは医師であり、看護婦さんだったわけです。看護婦さんを補助するおばさんはいたが、どういう名称だったかはわからない。一般には、「お手伝いのおばさん」といった感じでしょう。そのときでも、看護婦さんと、その補助、あるいは、お手伝いさんの区別は子供ながらにもわかっていた。

    で、家庭で老人介護をするというのは激務であり、非常に苦労が多い。そこで、近年になって現在のような介護保険、介護制度ができたわけでしょう。

    You didn’t know?

    それとも、けちをつけて、また、足を引っ張ろうとしただけですか?

  20. @Justin Thyme:

    you’ve repeated in Japanese the information I already posted in English.

    No you essentially duplicated the information I gave in Japanese.

    Ken Y-N (aka Tepido Naruhodo) March 29, 2012 at 12:58 am

    BTW, I thought they all took three shots at the exam, once every year? Oh, and why does the caregiver exam have a much lower Japanese pass rate than the nurse one – I’d have thought it would be easier?

    I responded,

    空 March 29, 2012 at 1:50 am
    @Ken Y-N (aka Tepido Naruhodo):
    , I thought they all took three shots at the exam, once every year?
    日本語で失礼します
    ……
    看護師の場合は、受験資格として、特別に学校で訓練され、試験勉強をしていることが必要なのに対して、介護師の場合は受験資格として、実務の訓練だけでもよく、かりに、介護資格の場合も、学校で特に、資格試験勉強をすれば、合格率はかなり高くなるみたいですね。

    in case of the nurses, to take the exam, they have to be specially trained and prepared for the exam at school while in case of caregivers, to take the exam, all they need is the real experiences, if they are trained at school their overall pass rate for caregivers is higher.

    You essentially repeated in English.

    Justin Thyme March 29, 2012 at 7:24 am
    One of the other reasons that the is lower than that for nurses is the nature of the candidates.
    Nursing candidates generally all aim to become fully qualified. On the other hand, some people start working as carers without intending to make it their career (the qualification itself has only been around since the late 80s). Some of these may end up taking the exam just to see if they can get it but aren’t heavily invested in the result.
    Also, without putting to fine a point on it, nursing candidates are usually better educated and/or better attuned to taking exams.

  21. @Justin Thyme:

    Justin Thyme March 29, 2012 at 12:18 am
    The 37.9% pass rate is for caregivers, not nurses. Caregivers need three years experience before they can take the state exam…..

    Ken Y-N (aka Tepido Naruhodo) March 29, 2012 at 12:58 am
    @Justin Thyme:…..

    BTW, I thought they all took three shots at the exam, once every year?

    空 March 29, 2012 at 1:50 am
    @Ken Y-N (aka Tepido Naruhodo):
    , I thought they all took three shots at the exam, once every year?

    ……

    来日後,日本の病院等で研修を受けながら3年以内
    (最高で3回受験できる)に国家試験に合格し,日
    本の資格を取ることを目指す
    http://www.ipss.go.jp/syoushika/bunken/data/pdf/19176305.pd

    In case of the nurses, they can take the exam three times within 3 years (and aim to pass the test)

    …..

    Is this the duplication of your comment?

    「介護福祉士候補者」として来日する。介護施設で3年間実務を経験した後、1月の国家試験を受ける。滞在は4年間に限られているため、チャンスは原則1度きり。不合格なら帰国を迫られる。
    http://mainichi.jp/select/wadai/news/20120329k0000m040047000c.html

    In case of caregivers, after three year experiences at the facility, thy take the exam. There is only one chance because they can stay only for four years.

    Is this the duplication of yours?

  22. @ 空

    お付き添いさんと呼ばれたかもしれない。1970,1980年代の話しですが、知り合いは出稼ぎで付き添いの仕事をやていました。患者さん本人かその家族に雇われて、病院の中、週7日、24時間体制で面倒をみました。その後、病院は完全看護制度に変わり、付き添いの仕事が無くなった。

    I think the helpers in the hospital that Sora rembers might have been Otsukisoi-sans. I had a friend who, in the 70′s and 80′s often went to Tokyo to work as a tsukisoi. She was hired either by the patient or their family and the positions were 24/7 staying in the hospital taking care of the patient. (In those days it was pretty much required that someone stay in the hospital with a patient and for those without willing/able family members the tsukisoi ladies filled the gap. My friend took care of some clients for years until they died). Later hospitals began providing total care and that job disappeared.

  23. Oops, browser crashed while I was writing and when I rewrote the comment, forgot to paste this in at the top

  24. ???? Can see the pasted-in quote in my comment but after sending it the quote seems to have disappeared. Anyway I was referring to what Sora wrote about the helpers in the hospital in the old days, he wasn’t sure what they wee called.

  25. @Tetsugirl:

    なるほど。

    http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/891195.html

    私も子供だったので記憶がさだかではありませんが、病院では、制服を着た看護婦さんにまじって、たしか、割ぽう着のようなものをつけたおばさんが居て、身の回りの世話をしたり、いまでいう介護みたいなことをやっていたような記憶があります。

    家庭では、嫁が舅姑の世話をするのは当たり前と思われていた時代で、下の世話なども大変だった。いまでも、家族が見る場合が多いですが、それでも、週何回かきてくれるヘルバーさん、そして、ショートステイなどが利用できるようになり、多少、楽になってきてはいるようですね。。

    因みに、介護福祉士は国家資格なのに対して、いわゆるヘルパーさんは国家資格ではないわけですね。

    http://www.kaigo-hukushishi.net/07_helper.html

    今問題になっている候補生でも、看護師としては、やはり、日本語なり医学的な知識はしっかり、身につけておいてほしいとは思いますが、ヘルバーさんとしては、たぶん、十分やっていけると思う。政府も融通を利かせるべき、というのが私の意見です。

Trackbacks and Pingbacks: