臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

「親職化」(parentification)是指在家庭互動模式中，兒童或青少年被指定負擔原先應由父母所應該提供的角色與責任。由於我國社會贊許子女協助父母分擔家務，往往忽略子女提早或過度地承擔父母親職責和角色，這種親職化現象可能對兒童或青少年造成負面影響。這個議題在國內僅有少數實證研究，在社會工作領域中，無論學術或實務界也尚未關注這個現象。因此，本研究採取質性研究取向，以半結構式的深入訪談法來蒐集資料，共有效訪問五名有親職化經驗的青少年。目的在於透過當事者角度，描述和詮釋他們自身的親職化經驗，以瞭解他們的親職化歷程、需求和資源使用狀況、此經驗形成的影響，以及他們如何看待如此的經驗。
本研究以「主題分析法」作為資料整理和分析的方法，歸納出七個共同主題：
一、家人缺席不在，或在而功能不彰：因為父母一方缺席、忙於工作、本身不當行為或是手足身心特殊狀況等情境，造成親職化現象的產生。
二、血濃於水，捨我其誰：孩子基於體恤父母或對家人責任感，因而去承擔父母親的許多責任，且體認到自己是維繫家庭運作角色的重要性。
三、期得關懷陪伴，或求物質協助：有孩子渴望獲得物質層面的支持，也有些孩子表示渴望獲得精神上的陪伴關懷勝於物質上的協助。
四、學習體驗多，有助未來用：孩子在思想上較同儕早熟，且分別在不同方面表現突出，並認為對未來成家立業會有所助益。
五、資源來四方，身心得紓壓：孩子分別獲得外界不同類型的資源協助，且孩子本身也自有一套紓壓方式。
六、重責難以擔，逾身心負荷：孩子在時間分配利用上會受到影響，此外，孩子也有難以勝任的感覺、產生不想再承擔的念頭，以及產生不同程度的身心症狀。
七、避重蹈覆轍，或適齡方承擔：多數孩子認為不要讓下一代重複經驗自己所承受過的經驗，也有少數孩子認為應該讓下一代在國中以後才能承擔工具性任務。
根據研究結果，本研究共提出五項討論：
一、「年齡」、「任務內容」和「工作量」三要素，可協助判別是否形成親職化行為。
二、親職化現象實為一連續性概念，可運用五個指標辨識親職化程度的高低。
三、當家庭需要產生親職化子女去承擔責任，長子女通常是首要考量人選。
四、與情感性任務相較下，工具性任務是孩子較為認可且較能勝任的範圍。
五、呼籲社福體系敏感和正視親職化現象的存在，並可從家庭功能作為著力之處。
最後，根據研究結果和討論，本研究對於社會工作領域的「政策面」、「學術面」、「實務面」及「教育面」提供建議，期能給予親職化孩子更多的關注和服務，並對於未來研究提供可行方向。

Parentification means that in the family interactive mode, the children or the youth are assigned the parental roles and bear the responsibility that the parents should take. We may not aware the problem that children play parental role in an inappropriate age and take responsibility excessively because the society encourages the children to share the housework to assist their parents. The phenomenon of parentification may cause the negative influence on the children or the youth. There are only a few empirical studies regarding this issue. Social work doesn’t pay close attention to such issue either in academic or practice field. The study adapted qualitative research method to collect the information through the semi-structured in-depth interview and effectively interviewed five youths who have had parentification experiences. The main purpose of the study is to understand the course of parentification, needs, resource used, the influence of the experience, coping strategies that the youths have been through. Also, their discourses were presented through the point of views of the persons involved and the experiences they describe and explain.
The present study used thematic analysis to integrate and analyze the information and to conclude with seven mutual subjects：
1.The family member(s) is (are) absent or present but lacks function：The phenomenon of parentification is generated due to the special situations occurred, such as the absence of one of the parents, busy in working, improper behaviors or the disability of siblings.
2.The thought of “Who can take it but me?”：The children who take the parental roles were sympathetic to their parents or other family members. In addition, they perceived themselves as the important role of maintaining the operation of their family.
3.They expect to be accompanied or to get concrete services：Some children long for concrete services only, others long for the companion and care more than the material assistance.
4.There were many learning experiences being helpful to the future：The children’s thoughts were more mature than those of their peers. They performed outstandingly in different aspects of life and they thought the experiences were helpful for marriage and career in the future.
5.The resources come from everywhere and their stress were relieved：The children get different kinds of resources from the outside world respectively. They also developed coping methods to relieve from the pressure.
6.The burden was too heavy to bear and beyond their loading either in physical or in psychological status： The children were influenced on their time distribution and usage. Besides, the children felt that it had being too difficult for them to bear the responsibility, it brought out the idea of giving up the burden, and it had produced different symptoms of body and mind.
7.Away from recommit into the same situation or take the responsibilities in an appropriate age：Most children thought not to let their next generation to repeat the disastrous experiences again. A few children suggest that the children could take the responsibility of bearing the instrumental assignments when they are in junior high schools.
The present study presents five discussions according to the results of the research：
1.The three elements including age, the content of assignment and work loading can be used to judge whether it is a parentification behavior or not.
2.The parentification can be treated as a continuum spectrum of phenomenon. The study suggests that the degree of parentification can be distinguished with five indexes.
3.When the family needs someone to take the parental responsibility, the oldest child is always the target person be considered.
4.Compared with emotional assignments, the instrumental assignments are more suitable to the range of children’s competences.
5.The study advocates that the social welfare systems should be sensitive to the phenomenon of parentification and put efforts toward the family function.
In the end, the study proposes suggestions to the policy, academic, empirical and educational aspects of social work. Hopefully it could provide more concern and awareness to the parentificationized children and present the possible direction for future studies.

第一章 緒論
第一節 研究背景……………………………………………………P.1
第二節 研究動機……………………………………………………P.4
第三節 研究目的……………………………………………………P.6

第二章 文獻探討
第一節 親職化內涵…………………………………………………P.7
第二節 親職化成因…………………………………………………P.11
第三節 親職化的影響………………………………………………P.15
第四節 成為親職化子女的考量因素………………………………P.20
第五節 國內親職化研究結果………………………………………P.23
第六節 研究方法之評述……………………………………………P.30

第三章 研究設計
第一節 研究取向……………………………………………………P.35
第二節 研究對象……………………………………………………P.37
第三節 資料蒐集方法與工具………………………………………P.41
第四節 資料整理與分析……………………………………………P.45
第五節 研究的嚴謹性………………………………………………P.56
第六節 倫理議題……………………………………………………P.58
第七節 研究者省思…………………………………………………P.60

第四章 研究結果
第一節 受訪者背景資料……………………………………………P.62
第二節 研究結果……………………………………………………P.67

第五章 結論、分析與建議
第一節 研究結果摘要………………………………………………P.118
第二節 結果分析和討論……………………………………………P.123
第三節 研究建議……………………………………………………P.133
第四節 研究限制和未來研究建議…………………………………P.139

參考書目……………………………………………………………P.143

附錄
附錄一 告知暨同意書………………………………………………P.148
附錄二 訪談大綱……………………………………………………P.149
附錄三 主題組型命名表……………………………………………P.151

一、西文部分

Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Spark, G.M.(1973). Invisible loyalties：Reciprocity in intergenerational family therapy. Hagerstown MD：Harper & Row.
Burnett, G., Jones, R. A., Bliwise, N. G. & Ross, L. T. (2006). Family unpredictability, parental alcoholism, and the development of parentification. American Journal of Family Therapy, Vol 34(3), pp. 181-189.
Carroll, J. J. & Robinson, B. E. (2000). Depression and parentification among adults as related to parental workaholism and alcoholism.The Family Journal, Vol 8(4), pp. 360-367.
Castro, D. M., Jones, R. A., Mirsalimi, H. (2004). Parentification and the Impostor Phenomenon: An Empirical Investigation. American Journal of Family Therapy, Vol 32(3), pp. 205-216.
Chase, N. D., Deming, M. P.,& Wells, M. C. (1998). Parentification, parental alcoholism, and academic status among young adults. American Journal of Family Therapy, Vol 26(2), pp. 105-114.
Godsall, R. E., Jurkovic, G. J., Emshoff, J., Anderson, L.,& Stanwyck, D. (2004). Why Some Kids Do Well in Bad Situations: Relation of Parental Alcohol Misuse and Parentification to Children's Self-Concept. Substance Use & Misuse, Vol 39(5), pp. 789-809.
Hooper, L. M. (2007). Expanding the discussion regarding parentification and its varied outcomes: Implications for mental health research and practice.Journal of Mental Health Counseling, Vol 29(4), pp. 322-337.
Hooper, L. M. (2007). The application of attachment theory and family systems theory to the phenomena of parentification. The Family Journal, Vol 15(3), pp. 217-223.
Jones, R. A. & Wells, M. (1996). An empirical study of parentification and personality. American Journal of Family Therapy, Vol 24(2),pp. 145-152.
Jones, R., & Wells, M. (1998). Relationship among childhood parentification, splitting, and dissociation: Preliminary findings. American Journal of Family Therapy, Vol 26(4), pp. 331-339.
Jones, R., & Wells, M.( 2000). Childhood parentification and shame-proneness: A preliminary study. American Journal of Family Therapy, Vol 28(1), pp. 19-27.
Jurkovic, G. J.(1997). Lost childhoods：The plight of the parentified child. New York, NY：Brunner/Mazel.
Jurkovic, G. J.,& Thirkield, A., Morrell, R. (2001). Parentification of adult children of divorce: A multidimensional analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol 30(2), pp. 245-257.
Kim, L. & Duane, R. (2005). Family processes and children's representations of parentification. Journal of Emotional Abuse, Vol 5(2-3), pp. 111-142.
Mayseless O., Bartholomew K., Henderson A., & Trinke S. (2004). "I was more her Mom than she was mine:" Role Reversal in a Community Sample. Family Relations, Vol 53(1), pp. 78.
Pakenham, K. I.、Bursnall, S.、Chiu, J.、Cannon T. (2006). The Psychosocial Impact of Caregiving on Young People Who Have a Parent With an Illness or Disability: Comparisons Between Young Caregivers and Noncaregivers. Rehabilitation Psychology, Vol 51(2), May 2006. pp. 113-126.
Shifren, K. (2001). Early caregiving and adult depression：Good news for young caregivers. The Gerontologist, Vol 41(2), pp. 188-190.
Shifren, K., Kachorek, L. V. (2003). Does early caregiving matter? The effects on young caregivers' adult mental health. International Journal of Behavioral Development, Vol 27(4), pp. 338-346.
Stein, J. A., Riedel, M., Rotheram-Borus, M. J. (1999). Parentification and its impact on adolescent children of parents with AIDS. Family Process, Vol 38(2), pp. 193-208.
Stein, J. A., Rotheram-Borus, M. J., .Lester, P. (2007) Impact of parentification on long-term outcomes among children of parents with HIV/AIDS. Family Process, Vol 46(3), pp. 317-333.
Tompkins T. L. (2007). Parentification and Maternal HIV Infection: Beneficial Role or Pathological Burden? Journal of Child and Family Studies, Vol 16(1), pp. 108.
Valleau, M. P., Bergner, R. M., & Horton, C. B. (1995). Parentification and caretaker syndrome：An empirical investigation. Family Therapy, Vol 22(3), pp. 157-164.
Wells, M., Glickauf-Hughes, C., & Jones, R. (1999). Codependency: A grass roots construct's relationship to shame-proneness, low self-esteem, and childhood parentification. American Journal of Family Therapy, Vol 27(1), pp. 63-71.
West, M. L.,& Keller, A. E. (1991). Parentification of the child: A case study of Bowlby's compulsive care-giving attachment pattern. American Journal of Psychotherapy, Vol 45(3), pp. 425-431.


二、中文部份

王雅各等合著(2004)。質性研究。台北：心理。
石芳萌(2007)。高中職學生親職化、自我分化與身心健康之相關研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系/碩士論文。
全國法規資料庫。兒童及少年福利法。下載於2009年12月1日。 (http://law.moj.gov.tw/Scripts/Query4B.asp?FullDoc=所有條文&Lcode=D0050001)
行政院主計處。就業、失業統計。下載於2007年7月15日。(http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/public/Attachment/01221624871.xls)
行政院主計處。人口-婚姻狀況統計。下載於2007年7月15日。(http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/year/y02-03.xls)
李政賢譯(2006)。質性研究－設計與計畫撰寫。台北：五南。
吳嘉瑜(2005,a)。倒轉的親子位置－「親職化」兒童之相關文獻探討。輔導季刊, 41(1),p.21-28
吳嘉瑜(2005,b)。「小大人」長大了--當親職化兒童成為治療者。輔導季刊, 41(4), p.29-36。
沈慶鴻(1997)。婚姻暴力代間傳遞之分析研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導學系博士論文。
林昭溶、林惠雅(1999)。國中學生親子衝突的因應歷程。本土心理學研究，12, p.47- 101。
林荷芳(2007)。諮商心理師的親職化經驗及其在諮商專業中之影響。高雄師範大學輔導與諮商研究所碩士論文。
侯季吟(2008)。弱勢家庭子女親職化與利社會行為之相關研究。國立臺南大學教育研究所碩士論文。
施教裕、宋麗玉(2006)。「高風險家庭關懷輔導處遇實施計劃」執行狀況初探。社區發展季刊, 114, p.103-117。
胡幼慧主編(1996)。質性研究－理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
高淑清(2008)。質性研究的 18堂課－首航初探之旅。高雄市：麗文文化。
高淑清(2009)。質性資料分析方法。「主題分析實務法第九期」的課程講義。國立中正大學清江學習中心。
柴蘭芬(2007)。高中生親子三角關係、手足關係與情緒適應之相關研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
徐宗國譯(1997)。質性研究概論。台北：巨流。
張虹雯(1998)。父母爭吵時的三角關係運作與兒童行為問題之相關研究。彰化師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文。
張進上、郭志通(2005)。客體關係治療在父母化個案之應用。輔導季刊, 41(1), p.29-37。
張進上、郭志通(2007)。兒童父母化的評估與治療。諮商與輔導，263，p.42-49。
張博雅(2004)。親子三角關係與大學生親密關係適應之相關研究。淡江大教育心理與諮商研究所碩士論文。
陳慧珊(2009)。大學生親職化現象、個體化程度與身心健康指標之相關研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
陶喆瑋(2009)。大學生知覺父母衝突之程度、情緒安全感受與親職化的相關研究。國立交通大學教育研究所碩士論文。
郭孟瑜(2005)。青少年的親子三角關係類型與人際行為之研究。國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
郭登聰(2006)。從高風險家庭關懷輔導處遇實施計畫，探討我國家庭政策的問題與對策。社區發展季刊, 114, p.86-102。
許惠雯(2007)。從親子三角關係、情緒安全感探討兒童知覺父母衝突與其適應之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
許舒雅(2008)。桃園區高中生獨生子女的親子三角關係、同儕關係與心理健康之關聯性研究。中原大學心理學研究所碩士論文。
黃瑞琴(1991)。質的教育研究方法。台北：心理出版社。
黃碧霞、林資芮(2007)。我國兒童保護措施之現況與展望。兒童及少年福利期刊, 11, p.1-18。
楊佳穎(2008)。大學生父母教養方式、親職化與心理適應之相關研究。國立屏東教育大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
葉致芬(2005)。孝悌楷模的家庭系統運作。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商研究所碩士論文。
蔡嫈娟(2005)。大學生子職知覺、親職化與子職實踐之相關研究。國立嘉義大學家庭教育研究所碩士論文。
蔡秋雄、高淑清(2006)。再見童年：國小單親女童親職化經驗的看見與省思。家庭教育與諮商學刊, 1, p.1-28。
鄭淑君(2002)。夫妻婚姻滿意度與其子女三角關係運作情形之分析研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商研究所碩士論文。
劉仲冬（1996）。民族誌研究法及實例。載於胡幼慧主編：質性研究－理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
戴嘉良(2009)。諮商師之傷害性親職化經驗：覺察、轉化與蛻變。國立花蓮教育大學諮商心理學研究所碩士論文。