台灣社會工作專業建制化過程研究：權力結構的歷史分析

A Study of Social Work Professional Institutionalization in Taiwan：Historical Analysis of the Power Structure

黃培潔(Pei-Jie Huang)

指導教授 ： 古允文

國立暨南國際大學/人文學院/社會政策與社會工作學系/博士(2014年)

https://doi.org/10.6837/NCNU.2014.00329

摘要

本研究旨在探索台灣社會工作專業制度建構的過程，放置在歷史脈絡下進行權力結構分析，採取批判典範路徑，以社會建構論為研究之方法論，透過批判論述方法來描述、詮釋與解釋所蒐集到的資料。試圖透過對歷史過程因素的了解、實際狀況發展的歸納分析，以爬梳出台灣社工專業建制化的過程，並以此為基礎，論證專業如何建制、專業建制的正當性以及專業化是否等於證照化這三個議題。

在文獻整理的階段，本研究認為台灣社會工作專業發展可區分為社會工作師法立法前、立法後及修法前三階段，這三個階段各自擁有該階段的發展特質，也擁有多元的介入力量及運作策略。在探討各階段專業發展過程時，需涵括社會事件及社會結構部份、需區辨出權力主體及權力客體並盡力描繪當中諸多之關係、亦不能忽略觀察決定社會重要議題當中權力關係運作的決策與非決策元素。

第四章針對三個階段的社會工作專業發展進行文本及過程分析，歸結出各階段發展重點：立法前追求專業化，立法後辨識建制化，修法前確保專業化。追求專業化是由學術界提出專業化的必要性開始，專業化途徑為「納入國家體制以維護並確認社會工作的專業性」，使得台灣社會工作專業的發展與國家產生密不可分的關係。立法後辨識建制化階段，則因對專業證照為主的立場不同，而發展出兩條不同的路徑，此不同路線的兩方，在本階段沒有出現相互對話的機會，而是運用不同的方式及行動，各自表述。在辨識建制化階段，產生出主流與邊緣等多方面的論述，這些的論述加上政府、學者及專業團體三方權力交互運作後，產出專業化不足的聲音，開啟確保專業化的序幕，出現社工師法修法行動。修法行動除展現社工群體間無法辯證討論、無法平行對話的事實，也呈現另一個專業權力掌控者-主流專業團體。最終，三階段的歷史文本中所勾勒出的專業化發展過程現象包含：社工師法與專業發展的共構關係，國家與專業間權力替換的交錯關係、社工專業中的內部對立關係。

第五章運用Lukes三面向的權力作為社會分析架構去描繪、詮釋以及解釋：社工專業化發展中決策的權力、非決策的權力、型塑並決定什麼是社會重要議題且形成決策的權力。以立法院公報作為決策權力的分析文本、以社工社群內部論述及行動作為非決策權力之分析內容、以報紙內容進行社會分析。之後，交叉比對三個文本分析結果，討論社會重要議題且形成決策的權力過程，進一步，去解釋權力的運作方式、權力的結構及分配策略、政治權力與專業發展的關係，從而爬梳出存在於台灣社會工作專業建制化中，既重疊又斷裂權力圖像。

本研究研究結果發現，台灣社會工作專業過程是圍繞著生存議題而建構的，使得台灣社會工作專業建制的過程中存在著權力關係，其中核心參與者為：政府、學術菁英、主流專業組織。在專業建制過程中，社會事件的影響力，不是一種直接的權力，但卻促使社工專業必須去面對社會問題，發展專業解決社會問題的機制及有效的工作方法。整體而言，台灣社會工作專業建制化的發展，從未跳脫尋求國家認可的思維及框架，國家角色也從未在爭取專業建制化的論述過程中缺席，甚至社工群體將社會工作專業制度，視為國家應當進行的社會政策之一。從追求專業化、辨識建制化及確保專業化的三階段發展中，更可清楚的看到國家在當中所被賦予及被給出的位置。雖然在三階段中出現不同的發策略及路徑，來執行社工專業的建制化，但對話的對象仍不脫國家、學術菁英及主流專業組織。這樣的意識形態及行動選擇，是來自於歷史脈絡，也來自於現實困境，其產出結果的確讓社會工作擁有專業的位置，但也實質的宣告著，透過納入國家相關考試及審查制度所建構出社會工作專業，必然與國家保持著密不可分的關係，於是以國家證照化所發展出的社工專業化，兩者間形成一種糾結暫時無解的困境。

所選擇的研究取向使得研究者採在一個事後諸葛的位置，在這趟研究旅程中，研究者持續的面對進出研究場域的壓抑、失語及解套過程。透過反思發現，參與社會工作師法立法及修法的團體及人士，在過程當中所出現的壟斷或是附庸行為，呈現的是一種脫離現實、麻木不仁與喪失思考能力的狀態，在此狀況之下所產出的社工專業建制化過程，無形之中變成一種平庸性的邪惡，再加上不做為及沉默者的參與，於是造成目前社工領域不安、紛爭、對立甚至絕望的現況。在這個現況下，曾參與社會工作專業制度發展的人們，必須關注的是實際作為下所產出結果，不論如何反覆的辯證或陳述，都不能用集體的無辜或是共識，來擺脫自身在這個過程中的真實存在、角色位置及該負的責任。而那些拒絕對此過程回應的參與者、喪失自主的從眾者以及盲目的實踐者，都必須嚴肅的看待自身在社工專業建制化中的參與行動，就是因為這些行動，現今的台灣社會工作專業才如此被產出。在台灣的發展過程分析中發現，證照化不必然是呈現專業化最好的選項，至於是否有更好的選項？除不斷重新思考社會工作的本質、初衷及專業的走向之外，就只能在後續的歷史、發展過程及結果中，去尋獲答案。

關鍵字

台灣社會工作 ； 批判論述分析 ； 專業化 ； 建制化 ； 歷史脈絡 ； 權力結構

並列摘要

The purpose of this research is to explore social work professional institutionalization process in Taiwan. Power structure analysis is conducted in historical context, employing the critical paradigm approach, and using social constructivism as research methodology, through critical discourse analysis as research method to describe, interpret and explain the collected data. It aims at sorting out the progress of social work professional institutionalization in Taiwan by understanding the historical elements and inducing the development of actual condition, based on which to demonstrate the three main subjects in this thesis: how social work has been professionalized and institutionalized; the justification of its institutionalization; is professionalization equal to certification.

In the literature review, this study suggests that the development of Taiwan’s social work profession could be divided into three phases: before legislative of Social Worker Act; after the promulgation of Social Worker Act and before making amendment to the Social Worker Act. All these three phases have their own development characteristics and distinguished multiple outer forces plus operational strategies. While discussing the professionalization progress in different phases, it is not only essential to consider the social structures and social events in different phases as well as the intricate relation between subjects and objects of the power, but to observe and discover the decision-making and non-decision-making elements which decide the power structure’s operation in important social issues.

The fourth chapter focuses on text analysis and processing analysis of social work professionalization and giving conclusion for the different point of emphasis in different development period: Before legislation period- it emphasized on pursuing the professionalization. After promulgation period- it is committed to identify the establishment. Before amendment to the Act period- it emphasized on ensuring the professionalization. The first period was the essential beginning for the academia to propose the professionalization. It was defined as ‘integrated into national institutions to maintain and recognize the profession of social work’, which makes the development of social work profession in Taiwan generated an inseparable relationship with the State. The second period developed two different ways for institutionalization due to the different attitudes toward certificationalization. Having no opportunities for mutual communication, the opposing sides acted and presented in their own ways. The mainstream groups and marginalized groups both produced multiple discourses during this period. Interacting with the power from government, academic elites and professional organizations, these discourses had found a niche in the prologue of guaranteeing professionalization before making amendment to the Act. Moreover, the action of Social Worker Act Amendments demonstrates the facts that the dialectic cannot be discussed and their dialogue was unable to parallel between the social work groups. It also emerged another power holder: the mainstream professional organizations. The result of historical texts in the three phases outlines the phenomenon of professionalization, which included：the constitutive relationship between the Social Worker Act and the professional development; the staggered relationship of alternation power between the state and the profession；the internal antagonistic relationship in the social work profession.

The fifth chapter applies Lukes’ Three-Dimensional Power as the social analysis framework, to describe, interpret and explain the overt power（Decision-making powers）, and the covert power（Non-decision-making powers）, as well as the power to shape desires and beliefs（The powers shaping significant social issues and forming decisions）in professionalization progress of social work. It applies the Legislative Yuan Official Gazette as Text analysis of Decision-making powers, the internal discourse of social work communities as the analysis of the content of the non-decision-making powers, the newspapers as social analysis text, then makes comparison to the three text analysis results, and discusses important social issues and the formation process of decision-making power. Further, to explain the operation, structure and distribution strategies of power, as well as the relationship between political power and professional development. The results shows that the institutionalization of the social work profession in Taiwan presents a both overlapping and broken power image.

The results of the research show that the social work professionalization in Taiwan is bound up with the theme of survival. It makes the government, the academic elites and mainstream professional organizations become the most decisive power holders in this institutionalization of the social work profession process. During this progress, the impact of social event is not a direct power but a force for professional social workers to face the social problems and to develop effective and practical methods in solving the problems. As a whole, the development of social work professionalization in Taiwan has never stopped in searching State authorization nor has the State stopped playing its role, endeavoring to build the social work institutionalization system. Even the social workers regard that the social work professionalization system as one of the should-have-done social policy that the State should operate. Among these three different stages (pursuing professionalization; identify the establishment and ensuring professionalization), it is very clear that the State has been considered and set as a very important part. All though different stages have different strategies to operate and practice the professionalization and institutionalization, they all have close interaction and conversation between the State, academic elites and mainstream professional organizations. This kind of ideology and development is due to the historical context and the dilemma in reality, which results in such a consequence: the social work in Taiwan which professionalized through assessment and examination that established by State is inseparable from the State. Therefore, the professionalization emerged from nation certification has fallen into a confused and temporally insolvable dilemma.

The researcher is using an afterthought perspective when doing the research, facing the depression, speechlessness and puzzle-solved during the whole process. Through reflection, it finds out the dependency and monopoly that the ones who have participated in legislating and amending the social work law has presented is a state of unrealistic, insensitive and lack of thinking. The social work professionalization and institutionalization built under this circumstance is no doubt a banality of evil. What’s more, the nonfeasance and indifference have caused negative effects such as conflict, opposition even desperation to the current social work field. Due to this condition, it is essential for today’s researchers to concern about the actual result caused by the operation. Their responsibility and obligation cannot be denied by collective innocence or collective agreement however the discrimination repeats. Those people who refuse to respond, go with the crowd and practice blindly have to take their actions seriously when participating in the social work professionalization and institutionalization. By their oversight, the current social work profession in Taiwan is defectively produced. According to the analysis of Taiwan’s social work development, it argues that certificate is not the best choice for professionalization. Yet, is there any better choices? The answer may only be chased in the follow up development but insistently think and explore the nature and intention of the social work profession.

並列關鍵字

Taiwan social work ； Critical discourse analysis ； Professionalization ； Institutionalization ； Historical context ； Power structure

參考文獻

參考文獻

中文部份

內政部（2001）。社政年報。台北：內政部社會司。

內政部（2002）。社政年報。台北：內政部社會司。

內政部（2003）。社政年報。台北：內政部社會司。