醫療人員對「有無繼續施用毒品傾向評估標準紀錄表」之看法

The Opinions of Medical Assessors on The Substance Re-use Assessment Instrument

陳秀玲(Chen Hsiu Ling)

指導教授 ： 周愫嫻

國立臺北大學/社會科學學院/犯罪學研究所/碩士(2014年)

摘要

論文提要內容:
對施用毒品者之處遇方式，台灣自1998年5月「毒品危害防制條例」修法後，創立勒戒前之觀察制度及強制戒治之處分，並以「有無繼續施用毒品傾向之評估標準」進行預測毒品再犯之可能性，提供檢察官參考。目前為止，尚未有研究從評估者的角度，瞭解評估表的內容是否適用。
本研究訪談10位具實務經驗之矯正機關、合約醫療人員評估者，訪談分析結果顯示:多數受訪者肯定「評估表」之架構，可做為評估者對受觀察勒戒人再犯評估的參照點及增加評估效率，因其書面結果係以科學方法評估再犯可能性，減少人為主觀因素之誤差，提供科學化、客觀及公正之結果供檢察官參考，減少駁回及相關訴訟產生。另受訪者也認為「評估表」各題項須加以修訂或改變題項配分，如在「臨床評估」加入評分驗尿項目涵蓋一、二、三級毒品、動機評估不適合使用精神科的CGI評量;而「社會穩定度」除探討個案家人跟工作之外，亦需增加個案交友圈之配分。本研究亦發現現行機制評估機制無對評估者進行教育訓練，各醫療團隊之間沒有針對評估之個案召開相關會議之溝通平台，彼此間難以達成共識，造成評估結果缺乏一致性，且受觀察勒戒人之有無繼續施用毒品傾向為觀察勒戒期間之重點，故處遇課程並非適用所有勒戒個案。本研究最後針對表格內容、評估流程、人員訓練等提出改善建議。
關鍵字：觀察勒戒、有無繼續施用毒品傾向評估標準記錄表、毒品再犯評估

關鍵字

毒品再犯評估 ； 有無繼續施用毒品傾向評估標準記錄表 ； 觀察勒戒

並列摘要

“Against Narcotics Act” was enforced on May , 1998.who receive rehabilitation treatment .Place in person of drugs used meet way, Taiwan build behind the law will it be May 1998 ' drugs endanger prevent from, make regulations ', create and tie the observation system before observation treatment and compulsory treatment, and by continued using the substance re-use assessment instrument to predict the possibility that the drugs user, offer a public procurator to consult. At present, not studying in terms of assessor yet, the content of understanding evaluation form is applicable.
The intersection of research and the intersection of interview and 10 this have the intersection of practice and the intersection of correction and organ, medical assessors of person of contract of experience, the interview analysis result reveals: Most the intersection of interviewee and definite structure of ' the substance re-use assessment instrument ', can as assessor to observe, rein in, give up people, recommit reference point that assess and increase, assess efficiency, because it fruits in the department and assesses and recommits possibility by scientific method in writing, reduce the error of the artificial subjective factor, the result of offering the scientific process, objective and just is for public procurator's reference, are reduced and rejected and the litigation is produced. Another interviewee thinks every question one of ' the substance re-use assessment instrument ' and must revise or change the question one and worthy of dividing too, such as in ' assess while being clinical ' add, grade, test the intersection of urine and project, contain one, two, tertiary drugs, motive, assess unsuitable to use CGI commenting amount of psychiatric department; And ' the social degree of stability ' gets rid of and canvasses the family of case with the work, the ones that also need to increase the case to make friends and enclose are worthy of dividing. This research also finds the current mechanism assesses the mechanism and has not carried on education and training to the assessor, have not held linking up the platform of relevant meeting to the case that is assessed between every medical group, between each other difficult to reach common understanding, cause, assess result, lack consistency and observe, rein in, give up to continue, use drugs, inclined to for observe, tie focal point give up, tight people, so observation treatment and is not applicable to all drug user in the place. This research trains etc. and offers the suggestion of improving to form content, assessment procedure, personnel finally.

Key words：observation system,the substance re-use assessment instrument,
drug recidivism assessment

並列關鍵字

drug recidivism assessment ； the substance re-use assessment instrument ； observation system

參考文獻

林明傑(2008)。藥物濫用者有無繼續施用傾向量表之量化修正研究。犯罪學期刊，11(1)，45-74。

林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花 (2005)。質性研究方法: 訪談模式與實施步驟分析。 身心障礙研究季刊，3(2)，122-136。

黃春美(2010)。毒品施用者再犯危險因子分析及預測。犯罪學期刊，13(1)，27-80。

劉明倫、楊延壽、吳四維、吳承江、許鶯珠(2009)。觀察勒戒毒品犯之戒癮動機評估。臺灣公共衛生雜誌，28(1)，35-45。

潘國仁(2012)。我國藥物濫用戒治處遇作為兼論毒品防制與社會工作。青少年犯罪防治研究期刊，4(1)，76-116。