解離性障害は、過去の記憶や自我同一性の正常な統合が、部分的あるいは完全に失われる疾患である。一般に直接的な注意の対象として選択される記憶や感覚は、正常ではかなり意識的にコントロールされているが、解離性障害においては、意識的で選択的なコントロールを行う能力が損なわれていると推定されている。解離性障害は、起源においては心因性であり、外傷的な出来事や解決しづらく耐え難い問題、あるいは障害された対人関係と密接に関連していると考えられている。

本症例は、表面的には患者が周囲に勝利を強く期待された試合で敗れたことを契機に発症した解離性健忘と考えられた。しかし初めて解離症状を発症してから約5年の歳月が経過しており、解離性健忘に至るまでに保護者を含む多くの指導者が、患者の解離症状を何度も目の当たりにしていた。また患者自身も強いストレスを自覚し、時に保護者に相談していたが、それまで特別な配慮はされていなかった。

これらの経験から、患者のストレス対処能力の形成をはじめ、スポーツ領域における精神保健において、早期の精神医学的な介入が必要であったと考えられた。また再発予防のためにも、精神医学的な心理教育が不可欠であると考えられた。

This article explores the background of patriotism which the construction workers in New York City clearly showed in 1970. They have been regarded as conservative by many previous studies. The reason for this is the “Hardhat Riot,” which happened in NYC in May, 1970. Hundreds of construction workers wearing hardhats attacked anti-Vietnam War protesters around Wall Street violently, chanting patriotic slogans. It is true that they were conservative politically but very little has been discussed about why they identified themselves as patriots then and what kinds of changes in their lives alienated them. This article focuses on their everyday lives and tries to elucidate the relationship between their daily lives and the patriotism they displayed.

When the “Hardhat Riot” occurred, many construction workers had been organized by the unions belonging to the Building and Construction Trades Council of Greater New York (BCTC). Every union had an original program for apprentices. To be an apprentice, having a father or relative who was a union member was an essential membership requirement. Consequently, membership was restricted and most of the members were white men from specific immigrant groups.

Having exclusively skilled workers had contributed to the unions’ negotiating power with contractors and had brought higher wages and stable employment

to the unions, so that they could establish substantial compensation

systems and insurance schemes, and scholarships for members. The bonds of

solidarity and camaraderie between the unions and the members had become

stronger in daily life. From the 1950s to the early 1960s the BCTC was at the

height of their power.

However, it was in the 1960s that the civil rights organizations started to

vehemently criticize the construction unions for discriminatory employment

practices. This criticism caused to the BCTC serious problems. Moreover, at

that time, the new technology of prefabrication started to be used on construction sites. This method of construction cut the costs and made many skilled workers redundant. The power these workers had enjoyed began to be challenged.

In this very situation, the anti-Vietnam War movement was gaining momentum and it came as a surprise to the construction workers. They were not only drafted more easily than students but could not evade military service in the way that many college students could. In reality the unions had many veterans and members who were serving as soldiers in Vietnam. Naturally, their discontent increased further.

Although the Nixon administration had announced the “Philadelphia Plan,” which required construction unions to establish a goal for minority employees, it approached the BCTC to get their political support for Nixon’s reelection. The BCTC tried to compromise with the Nixon administration despite having many problems with Nixon.

Clearly, the construction workers were not simple patriots. Their patriotism showed how complicated and ambivalent their feelings were at this time. They personally identified themselves as patriots to protect the order, values and the boundaries they had held when threatened by others.