2016 Volume 13 Pages 132-153
This paper aims to explicate how Konishi Takako formed ‘professionalism’ of
psychiatrist who was engaged in crime victim support. To explicate it, this paper
focuses on jurisdiction of psychic injury and inequality in care.
Primarily, Konishi claimed that ‘professions’ who worked together had to understand
psychic injury, for preventing victims from secondary victimization.
And Konishi formed ‘professionalism’ by determining psychic injury which was
lost in legal frame. Secondly, Konishi formed ‘professionalism’ by sophisticating
effectiveness of medical method. This medical method enabled psychiatrists to
prevent victims from secondary victimization. This secondary victimization
came up by becoming inequality in relationship between psychiatrist and client
obvious.
Above two ‘professionalisms’ were different level in following two points.
That is to say, who was intended to these ‘proffesionalisms’, and whether the
assailantness of psychiatrists were problematized or not. But ‘proffesionalism’ of
psychiatrists was formed by fitting above two ‘professionalisms’ together. These
psychiatrists engaged in actual practices of counseling, and demanded enactment
of law.
Focusing above two ‘professionalisms’, this paper explicated how the act of
psychiatrist who made a base of crime victim support was enabled. And this paper
explicated the historical process of practical base of crime victim care. This
process was not analyzed adequately in previous studies.
