Child Protection Policies in Japan, Germany, and Switzerland

Introduction

Child protection is considered one of the most important issues that states around the world try to address. This is largely due to an increasing number of cases of child abuse and mistreatment of children, regardless of the level of development in most countries. In order to assess the relationship between a country's level of development and its child protection policy, it is useful to examine specific national examples. This paper compares and contrasts the child protection policies of Japan, Germany, and Switzerland, along with the wide range of issues each policy entails.

According to a UN Human Development Index report from 2006, Japan ranked seventh among the three countries examined, Switzerland ninth, and Germany twenty-first (Yahoo Asia News, 2006). The index takes into account various indicators related to living standards, including "average life expectancy, education, literacy, the gross domestic product per capita and other factors, to calculate the Human Development Index" (Yahoo Asia News, 2006). This ranking provides a reasonably comprehensive picture of the actual situation in each country. Japan and Switzerland occupy top-ten positions, while Germany falls just below the twentieth mark. In Germany's case, it is worth noting that many public policy issues are discussed at the European Union level, and part of its ranking reflects the positive measures Germany has taken within the EU. Although child protection is not among the largest determinants of standard of living, it is nonetheless an important factor. Given that all three countries rank among the best-developed economies in the world, their child protection strategies should, in principle, reflect the financial means available to them.

Despite this apparent advantage, there are issues affecting children in each of these societies that remain unresolved. Child protection is essential to the future of any nation, as it reflects the state's commitment to building the foundations of a healthy society. Comparing child protection across these three countries allows their public policies to be evaluated in relation to public welfare — a major concern for both governments and citizens alike.

Although Japan, Germany, and Switzerland all demonstrate leadership in standards of living, Japan in particular appears to lag behind Germany and Switzerland in its attention to child protection as a political and institutional priority. This is largely attributable to Japan's traditional approach to public policy. Germany, as a member of the European Union, has benefited from both the experience of fellow member states and the EU's broader social framework, prompting stronger action on child protection policy. Switzerland, by contrast, is widely regarded as one of the most committed states in terms of social policy and represents a model for many countries — though, as the analysis below reveals, this reputation does not fully extend to child protection.

Before examining child protection policies directly, it is important to consider the factors that place these three countries among the world's leaders in standard of living. The specific data used to determine standard of living is less important than the overall developmental trend each country represents. In this respect, the information is most valuable as an indicator of tendency rather than precise measurement.

Japan is one of the richest countries in the world and represents a model of economic development and technological innovation. However, the last decade before this writing represented for Japan "a decade-long economic malaise and the potential threat of a financial implosion" (Clemons, 2002). This suggests that while Japan's technological advancements and governance structures are consistent with a top-ten country, some indicators reveal limitations in the Japanese state's ability to direct resources toward the most critical areas of society.

Comparison of Standards of Living Across Three States

Switzerland occupies an important position on the world stage. Its long-standing policy of neutrality has allowed it to maintain an independent stance both militarily and economically. The country's relationships with states across the world have developed, in recent decades, on the basis of financial services, banking facilities, and diverse investment opportunities offered to foreign investors. Situated geographically within the European continent but outside its major political and military alliances, Switzerland has maintained productive relations with virtually all nations and has sustained consistent economic growth.

Some indicators of Swiss economic strength relate to direct investment flows. According to the Swiss National Bank, "Direct investment abroad rose from CHF 563 billion to CHF 632 billion. Brisk investment activity by Swiss companies abroad, in particular, contributed to this development. The share of direct investment in total foreign assets rose by one percentage point to 21%" (National Bank of Switzerland, 2007). This figure illustrates the country's strong international economic and financial relationships.

Germany's situation is more complex. Unlike the other two countries, Germany's economic development is closely tied to the European Union, and its growth cannot be analyzed without reference to EU influence. According to a 2004 report, Germany's economy was showing signs of decline. The "Data Report 2004," issued by the German Federal Statistics Office, the Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB), and the Center for Survey Research and Methodology (ZUMA) in Mannheim, charted an increase in poverty from 12.5% in 2001 to 13.5% in 2002, as well as a growing income gap. The report also found that people in the eastern parts of the country were less satisfied than those in the west, and that "in many areas, including the material standard of living, Germany has slipped to the middle or even lower ranks in comparison to the other 14 earlier members of the European Union" (Deutsche Welle, 2004). Nonetheless, with government held by the Christian Democratic Party in coalition with the Social Democrats, considerable attention has been paid to social protection, including child welfare.

More recently, Germany has experienced an economic revival. Chancellor Angela Merkel stated that "Germany had taken a 'good step forward' in creating more jobs — a million fewer unemployed, a million gainfully employed — who could have thought such a development possible two years ago?" (BBC, 2007). This economic momentum supports the feasibility of the German state's goal of improving security and welfare across all sectors of society.

According to UNICEF, child protection encompasses "preventing and responding to violence, exploitation and abuse against children — including commercial sexual exploitation, trafficking, child labor and harmful traditional practices, such as female genital mutilation/cutting and child marriage" (UNICEF, 2006). These challenges exist in all countries regardless of economic development. The mistreatment of children is a sign of a systemic failure, and in most cases it is closely linked to poverty. Even the three prosperous countries examined here are not exempt, as every society contains economically disadvantaged areas and low-income families in which child abuse, abandonment, and other forms of harm may occur. With this in mind, the following sections examine how Japan, Switzerland, and Germany approach child protection and the extent to which their economic development has translated into effective policy.

Japan is well known for its strong family ties and the central role the family plays in society. Roger Goodman notes that the situation in Japan is somewhat contradictory: on one hand, the Japanese family is traditionally strong and deeply committed to its members; on the other hand, the number of child protection institutions — known as yogoshisetsu — has grown substantially (Goodman, 2000). These institutions represent the primary formal mechanism of child protection in Japan. The contradiction is striking: a society renowned for family cohesion has seen its residential child protection facilities fill with abandoned and abused children.

Beyond family-based concerns, Japan has also confronted the issue of child pornography and sexual exploitation. Driven in part by globalization and the expansion of internet communication, these issues have become pressing concerns. In response, Japan signed two international protocols specifically addressing the use of children for illicit purposes. The Foreign Ministry confirmed that Japan would sign "the optional protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child," including the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution, and child pornography, which "emphasizes the criminalization of serious violations of children's rights, namely the sale of children, illegal adoption, child prostitution and pornography" (Japan to sign protocol, 2002). This demonstrates the state's recognition that child protection requires legal and international action.

Child trafficking is another serious concern in Japan. UNICEF has noted that "children from Bangladesh and Nepal are trafficked to India for purposes of sexual exploitation" and that "children from South-East Asia are trafficked in large numbers to Japan and Thailand" (UNICEF, 2004). This underscores the need for strong international cooperation as a component of Japan's child protection strategy.

The German child protection system differs markedly from Japan's in that it centers on the family unit. Rather than removing children from their homes as a first response, Germany provides financial support to families to help them care for their children, on the premise that limited financial resources are among the primary drivers of abandonment (Kindler, 2007). Germany has also established an early-warning monitoring system that tracks children and families identified as being at risk, allowing authorities to intervene before situations become critical.

Child Protection Services: A Three-Country Comparison

The state plays a leading role in shaping child protection policy in Germany. As one source argued, "We all think with horror of the news of child abuse, neglect and deaths… In cases where parents clearly cannot cope with the raising of their children, the state must intervene" (BBC, 2007). Under this framework, overall policy direction is set at the national level, while implementation is managed with significant autonomy at the regional (Länder) level. Germany has also addressed the problem of child pornography, which is among the most widely discussed child protection concerns in the country. Despite some progress, more sustained long-term action is needed (Kindler, 2007).

Switzerland presents a paradox. It is one of the most prosperous countries in the world, yet its child protection framework is comparatively weak. Notably, "in Switzerland a certain level of corporal punishment of children is permitted. Even today, the country does not have any decree or regulation prohibiting corporal punishment or similar humiliating treatment of children" (Violence against children, 2002). This absence of a legal prohibition represents a significant gap in Switzerland's child protection framework, one that sits uneasily alongside the country's reputation for progressive social policy.

In terms of government funding, all three countries allocate substantial resources to child welfare. Japan spends considerably on shelters for homeless and abandoned children as well as on programs aimed at reintegrating young people into society. However, outcomes have been inconclusive: Goodman (2000) notes that children emerging from protective institutions often contribute to poverty cycles in low-income areas, suggesting limited improvement in their quality of life. In Germany, federal and regional authorities jointly fund and implement child protection programs, and the government has the primary responsibility for setting policy direction. In Switzerland, the state provides financial assistance to families to help them support their children, but there is limited discussion of whether children should be separated from their parents in cases of harm. The result is a system that prioritizes family financial support over direct child protection intervention (Violence against children, 2002).

All three countries have faced a common set of challenges over the past decade, many of which are driven by globalization. As communication across borders has become instantaneous and ubiquitous, the primary threats states must address increasingly include child trafficking, online pornography, and international child abductions. High-profile cases have occurred in all three countries, and none is immune to these transnational crimes. Although states have begun to take action — particularly at the national level — visible results remain limited. Addressing these challenges is a matter of time, resources, and, above all, political will.

It is difficult to draw a single definitive conclusion from the cases analyzed here. However, several observations stand out and point to the challenge even wealthy states face in building effective child protection systems.

On one hand, in an era of globalization with its attendant benefits and risks, it is noteworthy that these three countries have not more actively sought international assistance. Switzerland, for example, could benefit from external legal expertise in developing a stronger legislative framework for child protection.

On the other hand, the most significant general conclusion is that a country's economic strength does not automatically translate into adequate protection for all of its children. Switzerland illustrates this point clearly: despite being one of the richest countries in the world, it fails to ensure adequate support for homeless or abused children. The findings suggest that what matters is not the economic condition of the country under discussion, but rather the quality of the policies it enacts and the mechanisms it uses to implement them.

BBC. Merkel in child protection plea. 2007. 7 April 2008.

Clemons, Steven. "Koizumi Needs Fiscal Shot to Ring Round the World." New American Foundation / Daily Yomiuri. 2002. 7 April 2008.

Deutsche Welle. German Standard of Living in Decline. 2004. 7 April 2008.

Goodman, Roger. Children of the Japanese State: The Changing Role of Child Protection Institutions in Contemporary Japan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Japan to sign protocols for child protection. Japan Policy & Politics. 2002. 7 April 2008. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0XPQ/is_2002_May_13/ai_85877111/print

Kindler, Heinz. "Developing Evidence-Based Child Protection Practice: A View From Germany." German Youth Institute, Munich, Germany. 2007.