Is the criticism of Mentalist DaiGo correct?

Social worker in the real and the internet

1. Is flaming of homeless hate speech Ryogo's conspiring?

2. What Mentalist DaiGo really wanted to say in homeless discrimination

3. Mentalist DaiGo who was tossed by capitalism like homeless people

4. Business strategies of really smart people

5. Mentalist DaiGo and the Beggar master Warashibe Choja

6. Is the criticism of Mentalist DaiGo correct? ◄ Current page

6. Is the criticism of Mentalist DaiGo correct?

If both values ​​should be respected and allowed, shouldn't DaiGo's remarks this time also be allowed?

The pursuit of DaiGo seems to come from the same feelings as discrimination.

That's a natural point.

Along with the development of ICT and the spread of SNS, slander on the Internet is one of the social problems, like discrimination and hate crimes.

Even if the support group that asked DaiGo to improve his ideas and remarks suggested that homeless people should not be in danger, if they deviated from their purpose and gave materials to slander DaiGo. It cannot be said that there is no responsibility there.

One of the things I've always wondered is whether it's really right to blame someone for advocacy.

Please try to solve two problems of the social worker national examination in Japan.

In order not to see the answer immediately, I will write a sentence to some extent before presenting it.

If you want to know the answer immediately, please jump to the site from the URL below and check the answer.

Question 1: (Social worker exam 29th (2016) Foundation of counseling support and professional occupation) Reading the case, from the viewpoint of independence support for Girl B by staff member A (social worker) at a children's home, current situation Choose the two most appropriate actions to take.

[Exampl] ​​Girl B (17 years old) is in an orphanage due to abuse by her biological mother and her stepfather. Her mother's and stepfather's attitudes towards raising her and living conditions have improved considerably. Her mother and stepfather say they want to live with Girl B. When staff member A asked about Girl B's intentions, she said that although she understands her parents' feelings, she wants to go to university while living alone after leaving the facility. On the other hand, she says she wants to go to college, but is worried about living alone.

1. Ask students to objectively review their current academic ability and living ability.

2. In order to gain the understanding of her parents, instruct her to convey her intentions to her parents on her own responsibility.

3. Advise students to get a job and gain financial strength before thinking about going to college and living alone.

4. Advise staff members to learn knowledge and skills that they have not acquired in daily life.

5. I propose to collect information on resources that can be used together to find out how I can go on to university and live alone.

Social worker's past question "No. 26295" question-past question dot com (kakomonn.com)

Question 2: (Social worker exam 28th (2015) Bases of counseling support and professional occupations) Read the examples and select the most appropriate advice from a school social worker D (social worker).

[Example] ​​Boy E (7 years old), who is in the second grade of elementary school, often walks around his classroom during class. When his homeroom teacher warns Boy E about leaving his seat, Boy E panics and runs out of the classroom crying. Due to the significant delay in the progress of classes, the principal has received complaints from several guardians requesting a change of homeroom teacher. The principal decided to request the Board of Education to dispatch a school social worker and ask for advice. School social worker D visited the school and observed the lessons.

1. Advise the principal that it is necessary to transfer Boy E.

2. Advise the principal not to worry about complaints from parents.

3. Advise the principal that there is a need to assign a special support education supporter to provide individualized support.

4. Advise Boy E's homeroom teacher to be strict with Boy E's guidance.

5. Advise Boy E's parents to practice discipline at home.

Social worker's past question "No. 26447" question-past question dot com (kakomonn.com)

What did you think.

Don't you think that the work of social workers and its way of thinking are quite interesting?

It's really bad to suddenly solve a problem without presenting basic knowledge.

It doesn't matter if you can't get it right.

However, what I want you to understand is that the philosophy of social welfare is slightly different from the general way of thinking and how things are perceived.

Personally, I would like to see this concept spread to the general public.

However, in terms of life counseling and educational methods, it is different from the theory of guts and self-responsibility, and it is also different from the laissez-faire principle.

They are not blaming anyone or holding anyone accountable.

So, the correct answer for question 1 is 4 and 5, and the answer for question 2 is 3.

Don't get ahead of yourself without reason, and don't blame anyone.

The tendency of social welfare is to aim for a lasting and fundamental solution by diligently communicating with the person concerned and those around them without being bothersome.

For example, what would happen if we created a problem for the national exam for social workers in this flaming case?

Question 3: Select the most appropriate initial response for a social worker engaged in advocating the rights of homeless people.

[Example] ​​Mr. B, who is a celebrity, criticized homeless people on SNS. Most of the users of SNS criticized Mr. B's remarks, and some of Mr. B's followers were arguing against it. A television news report said, “B's remarks may raise the sense of discrimination against homeless people and may lead to assaults and other incidents in the future.”

1. From my SNS account, social worker A replied to Mr. B's account in a form that anyone can view, and asked him to retract his remarks.

2. Immediately posted a statement criticizing Mr. B's remarks as dangerous on the Internet in a form that anyone could read.

3. Social worker A tried to contact Mr. B for a discussion to confirm the intentions of Mr. B's remarks and the truthfulness of the reports.

4. Suggested government officials to strengthen support for homeless people.

5. In order to atone for Mr. B's crimes, social worker A planned to accompany Mr. B to a soup kitchen for homeless people.

It seems to me that social workers who learn at school are completely different from social workers who are active especially on the Internet.

According to social justice, even if there are victims and perpetrators, social workers are taught to be a profession that does not show animosity towards or favors either side and does not escalate conflicts.

It is true that most of the actual social welfare sites do not follow textbooks.

However, it is also true that they strictly adhere to what is written in textbooks and exams.

I wouldn't say that the support group that issued the emergency statement was careless.

I wouldn't say it's inappropriate.

In actual society, welfare organizations are also subdivided, and the homeless support group and the organization responsible for advocating rights on SNS are separate.

Perhaps there is an imbalance between the power to protect the homeless and the power to correct the problematic remarks of celebrities.

However, I simply doubt that the actual on-site social worker and the social worker on SNS look completely different.

Speaking of famous social actions on SNS, the MeToo movement may come to mind.

A woman who has been sexually harassed mainly complains on Twitter, and in response, many supporters unite and participate in the complaint.

This has a very strong influence and is a powerful social action that helps victims and people in similar circumstances. There are reports that estrangement between men and women leads to the destruction of communities, if not to the point of ruin.

If the purpose of SNS is to cause damage unintentionally by the sender, it is because they have lost control of their influence. It can be called "ICT pollution" or "SNS pollution".

Whether it's YouTube or other SNS, it's undeniable that the imperfect system that allows business to go against ethics is a factor in unnecessarily attacking the person who caused the flaming problem.

Also, there is a flaw in the law that can only stop discriminatory remarks with lynching.

Since SNS does not have a system to immediately suppress flaming commercials, it is also a problem that the attacks are excessive, not only for the words and deeds of the person concerned, but also for hurting the person's personality, incapacitating the person, and expulsion.

If there is a conflict between ideas somewhere, it is better to resolve it in a way that causes as little damage as possible to both sides and in a way that will not leave any trouble in the future.

Is it possible to say that the blade of the word that criticizes DaiGo has not hurt another person somewhere?

When we judge someone, even if it was justice at the time, that justice may hurt someone dear to us.

Speaking of which, while I was writing this blog, I found an article that linked the DaiGo blaze issue to the incident caused by Aum Shinrikyo.

It's going to take some time, but I'd like to write an article to refute this.

Thank you for reading.