臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

近年來，台灣對於兒童保護工作發展已有一定的規模，然而在兒童不當對待的類型中，兒童疏忽的成案量卻遠不及於兒童其他的虐待事件比例（例如身體或精神虐待類型）；而兒童疏忽事件的比例與英美兩國相比較，數據分布的落差相距甚大。台灣的社工對於兒童疏忽事件的判定依據的是何種指標？什麼樣的因素會影響社工對兒童疏忽事件的判定？本研究採用量化研究的典範，調查各縣市政府社會工作員有關於兒童疏忽事件判定的參考架構，探討影響這些社工員在判斷兒童疏忽照顧的相關因素。首先，本研究徵求各縣市政府社會局社會工作科同意提供接受訪談社工員的名單，總人數為397人，再針對這些社工員進行郵寄問卷的調查，最後共獲得232份的有效問卷，回覆率為58.4%。
本研究的兒童疏忽照顧態度方面，採用的是研究者翻譯自Polansky等人（1978）所設計之兒童照顧水準量表（Childhood Level of Living Scale，簡稱CLL）作為測量工具。本研究發現，這些受訪的社工員中，有育兒經驗者、有婚姻經驗者、工作單位為家防中心者，對於兒童疏忽照顧的態度要求較高，對於兒童疏忽之虞的擔心較高。當控制了社工員的育兒經驗與婚姻經驗之後，社工員的服務單位與督導支持滿意度皆能夠預測社工員兒童疏忽照顧態度的傾向，即家防中心的社工員、督導支持的滿意度較高者對於兒童疏忽照顧態度的要求較高，對於有兒童疏忽之虞的擔心也較高。本研究的發現意涵大致有三：（一）兒童疏忽照顧的態度是可以測量的，也可以作為訓練社工員對於兒童疏忽的照顧事件的敏感度；（二）社工員的督導支持滿意度有助於敏感兒童疏忽照顧事件的判定；（三）兒童疏忽事件的實際介入應加強兒童保護資源的提升，例如增加社工人力與工作資源。

In response to a recently increase in child abuse incidence, the child protection services (CPS) has been well developed. However, among the child maltreatment incidences, reported cases of child neglect were far less than physical and emotional abuse cases. When compared to the reporting incidences in the USA and UK, the reporting rate of child neglect incidences was quite marginalized in child maltreatment reports. This study examined what concept of child neglect social workers were based on and what factors predicted the identification of the reporting incidences. Using a quantitative approach, a total of 397 social workers from local governments were sampled to inquire about their attitudes toward child neglect identification, measured by Childhood Level of Living Scale (CLL), developed by Polansky (1978). Finally, 2hundred and thirty-two valid responses were collected, with a response rate of 58.4% Results indicated that social workers with child-rearing and marriage experience, and engaged in CPS work had better sense of childhood level of living and higher awareness of child neglect identification. After controlling for child-rearing and marriage experiences, social workers engaged in CPS work and with higher satisfaction with supervisor’ support had better sense of childhood level of living and higher awareness of child neglect identification. Suggestions were included. (a) Since the concept of child neglect could be measured, it would be feasible to enhance social workers’ sensitivity toward child neglect identification. (b) Since the level of supervisor’s support satisfaction could predict awareness of child neglect identification, it would be feasible to promote supervisor’s support for social workers engaged in CPS. (c) Since lacking of resources was associated with the reluctance to identify child neglect incidence, it would be helpful in increasing the identification of child neglect by increasing social worker manpower and working resources.

口試委員會審定書 i
謝 誌 ii
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 問題背景 1
第二節 研究動機與目的 3
第二章 文獻回顧 6
第二節 台灣的兒童保護制度 6
第二節 兒童疏忽之概念 12
第三節 兒童疏忽的評估方式 18
第四節 影響社工判斷兒童疏忽的因素 23
第三章 研究方法 28
第一節 研究典範的選取 28
第二節 研究設計 30
第三節 變項操作定義與測量 32
第四節 研究對象與抽樣設計 37
第五節 資料蒐集與分析處理 38
第六節 研究倫理 41
第四章 研究結果分析 42
第一節 受訪者的個人特質與工作環境資料分析 42
第二節 兒童疏忽照顧態度及兒童疏忽議題調查分析 48
第三節 影響兒童疏忽照顧態度相關因素之分析 51
第四節 個人特質、職場經驗和兒童疏忽照顧態度之分析 54
第五章 結論與建議 56
第一節 研究發現與討論 56
第二節 研究限制 59
第三節 研究建議 60
第四節 研究方向建議 62
參考書目 63
附錄一 兒童生活照顧態度量表各題回答百分比分配 67
附錄二 研究問卷 71

內政部（2007）。兒童及少年保護執行概況。內政部統計年報。
台灣社會工作專業人員協會（2005）。兒童及少年保護工作指南。台北：內政部。
李佩玲（2008）。兒少保社工員的自我效能、角色壓力與專業承諾間相關性之研究。東海大學社會工作系碩士論文。
余漢儀（1996）。兒童虐待—現象檢視與問題反思。台北：巨流。
余漢儀（1997）。兒童保護模式之探討—兼論社工決策及家外安置。台北：國科會專題研究計畫成果報告。
余漢儀（2002）。「兒童福利服務」，收錄於呂寶靜主編之『社會工作與台灣社會』，頁89-129，台北：巨流。
呂學榮（2007）。台灣公部門社工知覺之督導風格、充權感受與工作滿足感相關研究。國立台灣大學社會工作系碩士論文。
高媛媛（2005）。兒童虐待危機指標研判之研究。靜宜大學青少年兒童福利所碩士論文。
陳文俊編譯（2005）。社會科學研究方法。台北：雙葉。
陳向明（2002）。社會科學質的研究。台北：五南。
陳若平、張祐綾等譯（2007）。社會工作研究法。台北：五南。
許如悅（2001）。兒保社工員風險研判決策之初探性研究。東吳大學社會工作系碩士論文。
彭淑華（2006）。發展兒童及少年保護個案家庭處遇服務模式之研究。內政部委託研究期末報告。
黃源協（1999）。社會工作管理。台北：揚智。
黃翠紋（1999）。疏忽行為對兒童之影響及其防治策略之探討。警學叢刊，第30卷第3期，頁103-131。
黃婉菁（2003）。從工作生活品質、工作壓力觀點探討社會工作者對專業生涯承諾之相關研究。高雄醫學大學行為科學研究所碩士論文。
鄭瑞隆（1988）。我國兒童被虐待嚴重性之評估研究。中國文化大學兒童福利研究所碩士論文。
鄭麗珍（2009）。勿讓兒童生命淪為歷史重演的犧牲品！呼籲政府展現魄力 有效解決社工人力嚴重不足問題。社工專協網頁資料http://www.tasw.org.tw/p1-news-detail.php?sn=161。
潘淑滿（2003）。質性研究：理論與應用。台北：心理。
歐陽素鶯（1990）。對虐待兒童的行為界定之研究。中國文化大學兒童福利研究所碩士論文。
劉可屏（1993）。兒童虐待傷害認定標準研究報告。內政部委託研究。
劉可屏（2002）。兒童及少年受虐待及被疏忽研判指標研究計畫。內政部兒童局委託研究。
劉彥伯（2002）。縣市社工員行使兒童保護公權力之調查研究。東海大學社會工作系碩士論文。

Barnett, O., Miller-Perrin, C. L. & Perrin, R. D. (2005). Family Violence Across the Lifespan: An Introduction(2nd ed.). CA: SAGE.
Cocozza, M., Gustafsson, P. A., & Sydsjo, G. (2006). Child protection in Sweden: Are routine assessments reliable? Acta Pediatrica, 95, 1474-1480.
Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2007). Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect. 參考網址：www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/define.cfm
DePanfilis, D. (2006). Child Neglect: A Guide for Prevention, Assessment, and Intervention. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
DePanfilis, D., Scannapieco, M. (1994). Assessment the safety of children at risk of maltreatment: decision-making model. Child Welfare, LXXIII, No.3, 229-245.
Department for children, schools and families (2007). Referrals, Assessments and Children and Young People who are the subject of a Child Protection Plan or are on Child Protection Registers, England - Year ending 31 March 2007.
Dubowitz, H. (1994). Neglecting the neglect of neglect. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9(4), 556-560.
Dubowitz, H., Black, M., Starr, R. H. Jr., & Zuravin, S. (1993). A conceptual definition of child neglect. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20(1), 8-26.
Dubowitz, H., Klockner, A., Starr, R. H. Jr., Black, M. (1998). Community and Professional Definitions of child neglect. Child Maltreatment 3, 235-243.
English, D. J. (1990). Evaluationa and risk assessment of child neglect in public child protection services. In H. Dubowitz (Eds.), Neglected Children: Research, Practice, and Policy (p.191-210). CA: SAGE.
Giovannoni, J. M., & Becerra, R. M. (1979).Defining Child Abuse. NY: Free Press.
Gough, D. & Stanley, N. (2007). Policy, practice and decision making in child neglect. Child Abuse Review, 16, 71-73.
Hansen, D. J., Bumby, K. M., Lundquist, L. M., Chandler, R. M., Le, P. T., Futa, K. T. (1997). The influence of case and professional variables on the identification and reporting of child maltreatment: A study of licensed psychologists and certified masters social workers. Journal of Family Violence, 12(3), 313-332.
Horwath, J. (2007). Child Neglect: Identification & Assessment. NY: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN.
Horwath, J. (2004). Is this child neglect? The impact of difference in perceptions on social work practice, in Daniel, B. and Taylor, J. Child Neglect: Practice Issues for Health and Social Care. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Hudson, J. D. (1999). Decision making in child protection: The use of theoretical, empirical and procedural knowledge by novices and experts and implications for fieldwork placement. British Journal of Socail work, 29, 147-169.
Hutchison, E. D. (1989). Child protective screening decisions: An analysis of predictive factors. Social Work Research & Abstracts, 25(3), 9-15.
Leung, P. & Cheung, K. M. (1998). The impact of child protective service training: A longitudinal study of worker’s job performance, knowledge, and attitudes. Research on Social Work Practice, Vol.8, 6, 668-684.
Munro, E. (1998). Improving social workers’ knowledge base in child protection work. Br. J. Social Work, Vol.28, 89-105.
Polansky, N. A., Williams, D. P. (1978). Class orientations to child neglect. Social Workers, 23, 3, 397-401.
Polansky, N. A., Chalmers, M., Buttenwieser, E., & Williams, D. P. (1981). Damaged parents: An anatomy of child neglect. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Polansky, N. A., Ammons, P. W., ＆ Weathersby, B. L. (1983). Is there an American standard of child care? Social Workers, 28, 5, 341-346.
Righthand, S., Kerr, B., & Drach, K. (2003). Child maltreatment risk assessments: An evaluation guide. NY: The Haworth Press.
Ringwalt, C. & Caye, J. (1989).The effect of demographic factors on perceptions of child neglect. Children and Youth Services Review, Vol. 11, 133-144.
Rose, S. J., & Meezan, W. (1995). Child neglect: A study of the perceptions of mothers and child welfare workers. Children and Youth Services Review, 17(4). 471-486.
Roy, C., Black, T., Trocmé, N., MacLaurin, B., & Fallon, B. (2005). Child Neglect in Canada. CECW Information Sheet #27E. Montreal, QC: McGill University, School of Social Work. 參考網址http://www.cecw-cepb.ca/DocsEng/CISNeglect27E.pdf.
Smith, M. G., & Fong, R. (2004). The Children of Neglect: When no one cares. NY: Brunner-Routledge.
Stone, B. (1998). Child neglect: Practitioners’ perspectives. Child Abuse Review, 7, 87-96.
Stowman, S. A., & Donohue, B. (2005). Assessing child neglect: A review of standardized measures. Aggression and Behavior, 10, 491-512.
Trocmé, N. (1996). Development and preliminary evaluation of the Ontario child neglect index. Child Maltreatment, 1(2), 145-155.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth and Families. (2005). Child Maltreatment 2005. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 參考網址：http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm05
Wells, S. J., Fluke, J. D., Brown, C. H. (1995). The decision to investigate: Child protection practice in 12 local agencies. Child and Youth Services Review, 17(4), 523-546.
Wolock, I. (1982). Community characteristics and staff judgments in child abuse and neglect cases. Social Work Research & Abstracts, 18(2), 9-15.