What I found interesting in the process of the domestic violence law was the very grassroots beginning of the movement that became a law eventually. Many times, in the U.S. I feel as if though smaller advocacy groups are discouraged after there is not much action from the government to address such issues. With the lobbying and process of creating a law, it is impressive how a social issue that started quite small was able to spread and through connections improved so that eventually would reach the Diet and those that directly influence the laws.
I also thought that it was interesting that from the start there was a focus on including not just Japanese women but also immigrant women that find themselves in Japan faced with problems of domestic violence. This is also mentioned in the revision part of the law that spread then to a wider audience including children, foreigners, and children. In addition, there is a revision of the definition of the term domestic violence to no longer mean just physical; violence but also psychological and sexual violence perhaps in the form of coerced sexual intercourse in marriages.
In the reading, there is mention of the background of the reason of why children were included in the protection of the domestic violence law. I’m Curious about what were the events or processes of wanting to include foreigners in the protection of the law.
With the five dialogue sessions that took place before the actual revision of the domestic violence law was the inclusion of the domestic violence survivors and questions to appeal to the emotions of the policymakers? And additionally, to pressure the policy makers to consider the problem more and realize the importance of the issue? Do other issues usually have this many dialogue sessions or was this unique to this issue because it was a civil society issue?
Comments