透過您的圖書館登入
IP:34.230.35.103
  • 學位論文

監所戒酒輔導課程對酒駕犯之成效評估

Assessments of In-Prison Alcohol Abstinence Programs Toward Drunk-Driving Prisoners

指導教授 : 周愫嫻
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


酒駕肇事致死事件頻仍,民眾要求加重酒駕刑罰的呼聲一直不斷,2013年6月13日起,酒測值吐氣達0.25毫克就以公共危險罪章移送地檢署偵辦,以及5年內三犯刑法第185-3條者發監執行不得易科罰金。在此「嚴刑峻罰」下,監所儼然已經成為酒駕安養中心。酒駕受刑人逾九成為刑期六個月以下,在短短的執行期間,監所內的一般處遇措施並無法有效改變他們酗酒習慣及酒精使用的不良認知,出所後往往很快又回流監所。 本論文是透過法務部矯正署臺北看守所於2013年開設的戒酒輔導課程,以實驗法的方式,探討參與及未參與戒酒輔導課程的酒駕受刑人之戒酒成效為何,作為本文的研究目的。本研究樣本分為兩組:對照組(未參與課程)及實驗組(參與課程)各30人,樣本來源是以臺北看守所有期徒刑4月以上的酒駕受刑人為對象,由於樣本集中於兩個工場,因此係採兩段集中抽樣方法,平均抽選並分派至兩組,實驗組施以戒酒輔導課程,對照組則從事一般例行的教化活動,為期2個月。本文依照該所自行編製的課程評估問卷作為測量工具,進行前測與後測。 分析結果顯示:1、個人基本特性部份,如:年齡、教育程度、婚姻狀況、入監前工作、宗教信仰、入監服刑次數、刑期、累進處遇級數及已服刑期間等,兩組並無顯著差異,具有同質性,年齡多為36-45歲;低教育程度;單身及離婚者居多;低社經地位;大多具有宗教信仰;多為第一次入監執行;刑期大多是『6個月以上未滿1年』;累進處遇級數多為四級;已服刑期間以『未滿六個月者』居多。這些特徵也符合過去相關研究調查的酒駕者特性。2、經過2個月課程後,實驗組在戒酒輔導課程目標得分上,進步顯著高於對照組。3. 對照組之前測分數,顯著高於實驗組。 本文認為研究評估結果,受試者可以透過台北看守所現有酒駕課程改善其家庭支持、體能….等九項內容。未來監所可將本研究結果作為戒酒輔導課程修正的參考。此外,戒酒輔導課程應加強就業及生涯輔導並列為正式課程項目。最後,本課程可在監所外實施並實驗成效,若效果與類似,本文也建議未來不能安全駕駛罪可善用轉向處遇並結合社會資源,在社區中以類似課程,提供酒駕犯戒癮服務。 關鍵字:監所、酒駕受刑人、戒酒課程、評估

關鍵字

監所 酒駕受刑人 戒酒課程 評估

並列摘要


As fatal events because of drunk-driving accidents still frequently happened, the public never stop their requests to increase the penalties of drunk-driving. Since June 13, 2013, the drunk-driving over breath alcohol content 0.25 milligrams per liter was regarded as offense against Public Safety Chapter and will be transferred to Prosecutors’ Office for investigation. Additionally, the penalty of 3rd time within 5 years breaking Criminal Code Article 185-3 can’t be commuted to a fine. Under this kind of draconian punishment, the correctional institutions seem to be drunk-driving prisoners’ Nursing House. The sentences of over 90% of the drunk-driving prisoners are less than 6 months. In such short period of implementation, it’s unable to effectively change their drinking habits and bad perception of using alcohol by the general treatment measures in prison, resulting in coming back again to prison very quick after previous release. Based on the Alcohol Abstinence Programs (AAP) of Taipei Detention Center (TDC) started in 2013, the purpose of this study is to evaluate how is the alcohol-quitting effectiveness by experimental method between those joined AAP and those didn’t. The study samples were divided into two groups: the control group (not to participate in programs) and the experimental group (programs participation). There are 30 prisoners in each group, and the samples are sourcing from drunk-driving prisoners with sentences over 4 months in TDC. The samples are mainly from 2 workshops, therefore, they were chosen evenly and assigned to each group. Last for 2 months, the experimental group participated in AAP and the control group joined routine treatment activities. This study used the questionnaires designed by TDC itself as the measuring tool to pretest and post-test. The results show: 1. For basic characteristics of the individual, such as: age, education, marital status, occupation before implementation, religion, times of implementation, sentences, progressive treatment grade and the time been in prison, there is no significant difference between the 2 groups. The result has homogeneity, such as, mostly aged at 36-45 years old, poor education, mostly single or divorced, low socioeconomic status, most of them believing in religion, mainly first implementation, most sentences between 6 months and 1 year, mainly on 4th grade of progressive treatment, and the time been in prison less than 6 months at majority. These features are consistent with drunk-driver characteristics of past related researches. 2. After 2 months participating in AAP, the experimental group obviously got much more scores than control group. 3. The pretest scores of control group are significantly higher than experimental group. The result of this research evaluation shows, through currently existing AAP in TDC, the subjects in this survey can change himself in 9 aspects, including family support, physical capability...etc. In the future, the result of this study can be a reference for possible revision of AAP in TDC. Moreover, AAP should strengthen the employment and career counseling programs, and regard them as formal courses. Finally, this program can be implemented and experimented its result outside correctional institutions. If the effect is similar, this study suggested, in the future for drunk-driving cases, it could take good advantage of Diversion Action and combine social resources to offer drunk-driving prisoners services to quit alcohol by similar courses in community. Key words:prison, drunk-driving prisoners, alcohol abstinence programs, evaluation

參考文獻


曾文志(2006)。開創美好的生活-正向心理學的基本課題。師友月刊,(466),55-61。
黃翠紋、林淑君 (2014)。不同類型家庭暴力事件成因及特性之研究。亞洲家庭暴力與性侵害期刊,10(2),91-130。
Cavaiola, A. A. & Wuth, C. (2002). Assessment and Treatment of the DWI Offender. Philadelphia, PA:Haworth Press.
Carver, C. S. & Dunham, R. G. (1991). Abstinence expectancy and abstinence among men undergoing inpatient treatment for alcoholism. Journal of Substance Abuse, 3(1), 39-57.
Fradella, H. F. (2000). Mandatory Minimum Sentences: Arizona's Ineffective Tool for the Social Control of Driving Under the Influence. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 11(2), 113-135.

延伸閱讀