透過您的圖書館登入
IP:216.73.216.237
  • 學位論文

華人家庭孩子問題產生觀點與治療介入觀點--與結構家庭治療的對話

Ethical V.S.Systemic Viewpoints of Origin of Children Problems and Interventions--The Comparison of Chinese Family Therapists' Viewpoints with Structural Family Therapy

指導教授 : 陳秉華 黃光國
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


摘 要 本研究的目的是想透過對華人家庭治療師的訪談,了解華人家庭治療師怎樣看家庭問題的產生,及治療師如何進行家庭治療的介入,及這樣的家庭問題產生觀點與治療介入觀點與西方家族治療理論觀點有何異同,或必須加以調整的部分,希望從這樣的訪談和整理中,透過與西方家族治療理論觀點的對話,以建立華人的家庭治療特色。為了要與西方家庭治療理論觀點的對話,本研究也特別以結構家庭治療學派的治療介入觀點與與華人家庭治療介入觀點進行對話。 本研究以半結構深度訪談法,對16位華人地區(包括美國華人、台灣、香港、新加坡)的家庭治療師進行訪談,蒐集資料,並將訪談的結果寫成逐字稿分析,並以電腦軟體NUDIST做為資料分析的輔助工具。資料的收集與分析,首先依照紮根理論研究法中開放譯碼的程序形成每位治療師的訪談分類稿,後研究者從文獻閱灠、家庭治療實務經驗,秉著對理論建構的敏感度,而建構出華人家庭與結構家庭治療對家庭問題產生看法概念模式及華人家庭與結構家庭治療對家庭治療介入觀點概念模式。茲將研究結果說明如下。 有關華人家庭與結構家庭治療對家庭問題產生看法,研究者說明結構家庭治療學派是以「系統觀」的角度來看家庭問題的產生,而華人家庭則應以「倫理觀」的角度來看家庭問題的產生。研究者並以幾個向度,包括「文化價值」、「父母角色價值」、「子女追求自我」、「親子關係」等,以進一步說明「系統觀」角度及「倫理觀」角度引發家庭問題的不同觀點。在「文化價值」此一向度的差異,結構家庭治療學派認為家庭孩子問題的產生是源於「追求個人權利」的價值取向;而華人家庭孩子問題產生是源於「盡義務」的價值取向。在「父母角色價值」此一向度,結構家庭治療學派認為家庭孩子問題的產生是源於「父母角色失功能」;而在華人家庭孩子問題產生是源於「父母的角色義務」。在「子女發展自我」此一向度,結構家庭治療學派認為家庭孩子問題的產生是源於孩子的「獨立我」未能發展;而華人家庭孩子問題的產生是源於「關係我」的要求。在「親子關係」此一向度,結構家庭治療學派認為家庭孩子問題的產生是源於親子間的「聯盟關係」;而華人家庭孩子問題產生是源於「權威上下關係」。 有關華人家庭與結構家庭治療對家庭治療介入觀點,研究者認為結構家庭治療學派是以「系統觀」的角度來進行家庭治療的介入,而華人家庭則是以「倫理觀」的角度來進行家庭治療的介入。研究者也以幾個向度來說明西方結構家庭治療「系統觀」的角度進行家庭治療的介入觀點及華人社會中「倫理觀」的角度來進行家庭治療的介入觀點的異同。就「治療價值」此一向度,西方結構家庭治療「系統觀」的角度,較重視「權利的維護」,而華人社會中「倫理觀」的角度,則較重視「關係的建立」。而在「父母角色價值」此一向度,西方結構家庭治療介入重視「角色功能的建立」;而華人家庭治療則重視對父母「角色義務的支持」。在「子女追求自我發展」此一向度,西方結構家庭治療強調幫助孩子「發展獨立我」,華人家庭治療則強調孩子「追求關係我與獨立我的平衡」。在「親子關係」此一向度,西方結構家庭治療強調「建立彈性、理性的權威關係」,;而華人家庭治療則強調「建立親子關係的連結」。

並列摘要


Ethical V.S. Systemic viewpoints of origin of Children problem and intervention—The comparison of Chinese family therapists’ viewpoints with structural family therapy Shu Yu You Abstracts The main purpose of this study were:(1)to understand how Chinese family therapists evaluated children problems in Chinese family(2)to understand with what viewpoints Chinese family therapists intervened in family therapy(3)to compare structural family therapy viewpoints with Chinese family therapist’s viewpoints (4)to construct Chinese family therapy viewpoints. 16 Chinese family therapists lived in and practiced their works in different areas (including U.S. ,Taiwan,Hong Kong and Singapore) were interviewed with the method of semi-structural depth interview. The interviewing data were transcribed into verbatim and were analyzed with the method of “open coding” of grounded theory. The Chinese family therapist’s viewpoints about the origins of the children problems and the interventions were constructed afterwards. The researcher compared the Chinese family therapist’s viewpoints of origins of children’s problems based on the research findings with the viewpoints of structural oriented family therapy. Researcher pointed out that children problems arised from the “systemic” viewpoint in structural family therapy;while the “ethical” viewpoint in Chinese family therapists. Four dimensions distinguished the “systemic“ viewpoint from “ethical” viewpoint. They were cultural value, parent role , children self development, and parent-children relationship. The researcher also compared the Chinese family therapist’s ethical viewpoints of family therapy interventions with the systemic structural oriented family therapy. In the dimension of cultural value, structural family therapy asserted that family therapy emphasized the guard of individual right; while Chinese family therapists asserted building of relationship. In the dimension of parent role, structural family therapy asserted that family therapy was to strengthen parent role of function; while Chinese family therapists asserted that family therapy was to support parent role of obligation. In the dimension of children self development, structural family therapy asserted that family therapy was to help children develop independent self; while Chinese family therapy asserted the balance between relational self and independent self. In the dimension of parent-children relationship, structural family therapy asserted that family therapy was to build flexible, rational, authoritative relationship; while Chinese family therapists asserted to build relationship between parents and children. The research outcome provided in-dept analysis of conducting western family therapy in Chinese cultural contexts. The development of theory and practice of Chinese family therapy was expected in the future.

參考文獻


李美枝(1998) 中國人親子關係的內涵與功能:以大學生為例。本土心理學研究,第九期,3-54頁。
李亦園(1989) 中國家族與其儀式:若干觀念的檢討。載於楊國樞主編:中國人的心理(1-24頁)。台北市:桂冠圖書公司。
賈紅鶯(2000) 一個家庭的癥狀與家庭互動的轉變歷程—結構—策略家族治療的觀點。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導博士論文。
Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
Clinical guidelines in cross-cultural mental health(pp9-32),New

被引用紀錄


趙冉(2015)。文化觀點下台灣諮商師對親子衝突的概念化及介入策略〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2015.01711
田禮瑋(2008)。由家庭脈絡呈現重鬱症病友手足的聲音〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2008.02350
黃盈彰(2007)。男性繼承家業之生涯選擇歷程敘事研究〔碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-2910200810542600
歐陽儀(2009)。父母自我分化,親子三角關係,青少年子女自我分化對青少年子女身心健康影響之研究〔博士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-1610201315171658
張碧琴(2012)。依附取向親子治療歷程研究-以依附創傷兒童為例〔博士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-1610201315280517

延伸閱讀