Family policy in Japan - Revision history

Vipul at 17:24, 9 March 2014

2014-03-09T17:24:53Z

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 The general aim of the Japanese government has been to operate within the existing family structure norm rather than radically change them. As the norms have changed, the Japanese government's policies have changed somewhat.
 ==Context of fertility goals==
@@ Line 37: / Line 39: @@
 | 2004 || pronatalist || government subsidies for infertility treatments began|| 1.318, 1.29, '''1.288''', 1.254, 1.313
 |}

Vipul: /* Policy timeline */

2014-03-09T17:14:12Z

Policy timeline

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:14, 9 March 2014
Line 17:		Line 17:
	==Policy timeline==		==Policy timeline==

	See [http://www.eastwestcenter.org/fileadmin/stored/pdfs/POPwp118.pdf this paper] for the pro-natalist policy timeline.		See [http://www.eastwestcenter.org/fileadmin/stored/pdfs/POPwp118.pdf this paper] for the pro-natalist policy timeline. For a more complete list of all policies relevant to fertility, see [[Fertility in Japan#Key events]].
	{\| class="sortable" border="1"		{\| class="sortable" border="1"
	! Year !! Direction (pronatalist versus antinatalist) based on intentions and naive reasoning about effects !! Event !! [[Total fertility rate]] values in that year and nearby years (relevant year in bold)		! Year !! Direction (pronatalist versus antinatalist) based on intentions and naive reasoning about effects !! Event !! [[Total fertility rate]] values in that year and nearby years (relevant year in bold)

Vipul: /* Policy timeline */

2014-03-09T17:13:20Z

Policy timeline

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:13, 9 March 2014
Line 19:		Line 19:
	See [http://www.eastwestcenter.org/fileadmin/stored/pdfs/POPwp118.pdf this paper] for the pro-natalist policy timeline.		See [http://www.eastwestcenter.org/fileadmin/stored/pdfs/POPwp118.pdf this paper] for the pro-natalist policy timeline.
	{\| class="sortable" border="1"		{\| class="sortable" border="1"
	! Year !! Direction (pronatalist versus antinatalist) based on intentions and naive reasoning about effects !! Event ~~!! Postulated effects seen in fertility statistics~~ !! [[Total fertility rate]] values in that year and nearby years (relevant year in bold)		! Year !! Direction (pronatalist versus antinatalist) based on intentions and naive reasoning about effects !! Event !! [[Total fertility rate]] values in that year and nearby years (relevant year in bold)
	\|-		\|-
	\| 1972 \|\| pronatalist \|\| The Japanese government, foreseeing that fertility would soon drop to below the [[replacement fertility]] level, introduced a per-child subsidy. \|\| \|\|		\| 1972 \|\| pronatalist \|\| The Japanese government, foreseeing that fertility would soon drop to below the [[replacement fertility]] level, introduced a per-child subsidy. \|\|
	\|-		\|-
	\| 1991 \|\| pronatalist \|\| Childcare Leave Act passed by Japanese government aimed at helping working mothers \|\| \|\| 1.576, 1.543, '''1.537''', 1.506, 1.464		\| 1991 \|\| pronatalist \|\| Childcare Leave Act passed by Japanese government aimed at helping working mothers \|\| 1.576, 1.543, '''1.537''', 1.506, 1.464
	\|-		\|-
	\| 1994 \|\| pronatalist \|\| government passed a four-year Angel Plan 1995-99 (officially known as the "Basic Direction for Future Childbearing Support Measures") with the primary goal being to establish more day-care centers to make parenting easier (and thereby, more attractive) \|\| \|\| 1.506, 1.464, '''1.507''', 1.426, 1.43		\| 1994 \|\| pronatalist \|\| government passed a four-year Angel Plan 1995-99 (officially known as the "Basic Direction for Future Childbearing Support Measures") with the primary goal being to establish more day-care centers to make parenting easier (and thereby, more attractive)\|\| 1.506, 1.464, '''1.507''', 1.426, 1.43
	\|-		\|-
	\| 1999 \|\| pronatalist \|\| government passed a New Angel Plan building on the earlier Angel Plan, to build more day-care centers and after-school support. \|\| \|\| 1.392, 1.388, '''1.347''', 1.318, 1.29		\| 1999 \|\| pronatalist \|\| government passed a New Angel Plan building on the earlier Angel Plan, to build more day-care centers and after-school support. \|\| 1.392, 1.388, '''1.347''', 1.318, 1.29
	\|-		\|-
	\| 2001 \|\| pronatalist \|\| Employment Insurance Law was amended, specifying that 40% salary was to be paid to regular full-time employees on childcare leave \|\| \|\| 1.347, 1.359, '''1.336''', 1.318, 1.29		\| 2001 \|\| pronatalist \|\| Employment Insurance Law was amended, specifying that 40% salary was to be paid to regular full-time employees on childcare leave\|\| 1.347, 1.359, '''1.336''', 1.318, 1.29
	\|-		\|-
	\| 2002 \|\| pronatalist \|\| "Plus One" plan announced by the government, encouraging fathers to take five-day paternity leave following childbirth \|\| \|\| 1.359, 1.336, '''1.318''', 1.29, 1.288		\| 2002 \|\| pronatalist \|\| "Plus One" plan announced by the government, encouraging fathers to take five-day paternity leave following childbirth\|\| 1.359, 1.336, '''1.318''', 1.29, 1.288
	\|-		\|-
	\| 2003 \|\| pronatalist \|\| Japanese government passed "Next Generation" law and "Law for Measures to Support the Development of the Next Generation." These required any business with more than 300 workers to create a "plan" for raising the fertility level of its workers \|\| \|\| 1.336, 1.318, '''1.29''', 1.288, 1.254		\| 2003 \|\| pronatalist \|\| Japanese government passed "Next Generation" law and "Law for Measures to Support the Development of the Next Generation." These required any business with more than 300 workers to create a "plan" for raising the fertility level of its workers\|\| 1.336, 1.318, '''1.29''', 1.288, 1.254
	\|-		\|-
	\| 2004 \|\| pronatalist \|\| government subsidies for infertility treatments began \|\| \|\| 1.318, 1.29, '''1.288''', 1.254, 1.313		\| 2004 \|\| pronatalist \|\| government subsidies for infertility treatments began\|\| 1.318, 1.29, '''1.288''', 1.254, 1.313
	\|}		\|}

Vipul at 17:10, 9 March 2014

2014-03-09T17:10:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:10, 9 March 2014
Line 2:		Line 2:

	This page provides an overview of family policy in Japan.		This page provides an overview of family policy in Japan.

			==Context of family structure==

			{{further\|[[family structure in Japan]]}}

			The post-World War II family structures (the salaryman structure and the US-inspired love-based structure) had a highly asymmetric division of labor, with men expected to work very hard in their jobs to provide for the family, and women expected to do almost all the domestic production and household management, including rearing and educating children.

			The general aim of the Japanese government has been to operate within the existing family structure norm rather than radically change them. As the norms have changed, the Japanese government's policies have changed somewhat.

			==Context of fertility goals==

			The Japanese government was generally supportive of the goal of reducing fertility in the immediate post-World War II years. This can be seen in the legalization of abortion. However, around 1972, seeing that fertility was close to replacement, it switched to pro-natalist goals. The government has stuck with pro-natalist goals and fertility is well below replacement despite the government's efforts.

			==Policy timeline==

			See [http://www.eastwestcenter.org/fileadmin/stored/pdfs/POPwp118.pdf this paper] for the pro-natalist policy timeline.
			{\| class="sortable" border="1"
			! Year !! Direction (pronatalist versus antinatalist) based on intentions and naive reasoning about effects !! Event !! Postulated effects seen in fertility statistics !! [[Total fertility rate]] values in that year and nearby years (relevant year in bold)
			\|-
			\| 1972 \|\| pronatalist \|\| The Japanese government, foreseeing that fertility would soon drop to below the [[replacement fertility]] level, introduced a per-child subsidy. \|\| \|\|
			\|-
			\| 1991 \|\| pronatalist \|\| Childcare Leave Act passed by Japanese government aimed at helping working mothers \|\| \|\| 1.576, 1.543, '''1.537''', 1.506, 1.464
			\|-
			\| 1994 \|\| pronatalist \|\| government passed a four-year Angel Plan 1995-99 (officially known as the "Basic Direction for Future Childbearing Support Measures") with the primary goal being to establish more day-care centers to make parenting easier (and thereby, more attractive) \|\| \|\| 1.506, 1.464, '''1.507''', 1.426, 1.43
			\|-
			\| 1999 \|\| pronatalist \|\| government passed a New Angel Plan building on the earlier Angel Plan, to build more day-care centers and after-school support. \|\| \|\| 1.392, 1.388, '''1.347''', 1.318, 1.29
			\|-
			\| 2001 \|\| pronatalist \|\| Employment Insurance Law was amended, specifying that 40% salary was to be paid to regular full-time employees on childcare leave \|\| \|\| 1.347, 1.359, '''1.336''', 1.318, 1.29
			\|-
			\| 2002 \|\| pronatalist \|\| "Plus One" plan announced by the government, encouraging fathers to take five-day paternity leave following childbirth \|\| \|\| 1.359, 1.336, '''1.318''', 1.29, 1.288
			\|-
			\| 2003 \|\| pronatalist \|\| Japanese government passed "Next Generation" law and "Law for Measures to Support the Development of the Next Generation." These required any business with more than 300 workers to create a "plan" for raising the fertility level of its workers \|\| \|\| 1.336, 1.318, '''1.29''', 1.288, 1.254
			\|-
			\| 2004 \|\| pronatalist \|\| government subsidies for infertility treatments began \|\| \|\| 1.318, 1.29, '''1.288''', 1.254, 1.313
			\|}

Vipul: Created page with "{{country-specific information|information type = family policy|country = Japan}} This page provides an overview of family policy in Japan."

2014-03-09T02:03:58Z

Created page with "{{country-specific information|information type = family policy|country = Japan}} This page provides an overview of family policy in Japan."

New page

{{country-specific information|information type = family policy|country = Japan}}

This page provides an overview of family policy in Japan.