Title

親密關係暴力危險評估:實務操作方法的探討

Translated Titles

Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment: Exploring the Practical Methods

DOI

10.6785/SPSW.200906.0141

Authors

王珮玲(Pei-Ling Wang)

Key Words

親密關係暴力 ; 危險評估 ; 評估方法 ; 跨機構危險評估會議 ; 整合性危險評估模式 ; intimate partner violence ; risk assessment ; assessment method ; multiple-agency risk assessment conference ; coordinated risk assessment model

PublicationName

社會政策與社會工作學刊

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

13卷1期(2009 / 06 / 01)

Page #

141 - 184

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

親密關係暴力危險評估是近年來學術界與實務界非常關注的議題,在我國亦開始逐步推動相關的危險評估方案,但針對親密關係暴力危險評估在方法上應如何操作,至今仍無較具體與一致的模式。本文檢視文獻將親密暴力危險評估的方法歸類爲四類:非結構性的臨床評估、量表評估、被害人自我評估及跨機構危險評估等,透過質性研究法,深入訪談九位參與實施危險評估方案的實務工作者,了解實務工作人員如何進行危險評估,以及不同評估方法對危險評估的助益與限制。最後本文根據研究發現,進而就實務操作未來之發展,提出整合性危險評估模式,流程區分爲第一階段初步評估、第二階段專業詐估及第三階段之整合性評估與風險管理,並提出實務操作之相關建義。

English Abstract

There are more concerns for academic and practical professionals on intimate partner violence risk assessment recently. In Taiwan, a couple of risk assessment programs regarded to intimate partner violence have been initiated. However, how should intimate partner violence risk assessment be conducted? It's still under discussion. This paper reviewed literature and categoried four intimate partner violence risk assessment methods: unstructured clinical assessment, actuarial assessment, victim's assessment, and multiple-agency risk assessment conference. Via interviewing 9 social workers and police officers, this research aims to understand how front line service providers conducting risk assessment. What are their experiences on the four kinds risk assessment methods? And what are the benefits and limits on conducting the four risk assessment methods? The research results indicated that the data sources, costs, specialities, limits and validity of each risk assessment methods. Finally, this paper suggested a coordinated risk assessment model which including three stages and combining the four methods. Also, some suggestions for future development are presented.

Topic Category 社會科學 > 社會學
Reference
  1. 林明傑、沈勝昂(2003)。我國婚姻暴力加害人之危險評估:DA量表在我國適用之研究。犯罪學期刊,6(2),177-216。
    連結:
  2. Risk Identification Checklist for the Identification of High Risk Cases of Domestic Abuse, Stalking and Honour-based Violence
  3. Campbell, J. C.(2005).Assessing Dangerousness in Domestic Violence Cases: History, Challenges, and Opportunities.Criminology,43(4),653-672.
  4. Campbell, J. C.(2004).Helping Women Understand Their Risk in Situations of Intimate Partner Violence.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,19(12),1464-1477.
  5. Campbell, J. C. (ed.)(1995).Assessing Dangerousness: Violence by Sexual Offenders, Batterers, and Child Abusers.Thousand Oak, CA:Sage.
  6. Campbell, J. C.,D. W. Webster,N. Glass(2009).The Danger Assessment: Validation of a Lethality Risk Assessment Instrument for Intimate Partner Femicide.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,24(4),653-674.
  7. Campbell, J. C.,P. Sharps,N. Glass,G. F. Pinard (eds.),L. Pagani (eds.)(2001).Clinical Assessment of Dangerousness: Empirical Ccontributions.New York:Plenum.
  8. Davies, J.,E. Lyon(1998).Safety Planning with Battered Women.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
  9. Dolan, M.,M. Doyle(2000).Violence Risk Prediction: Clinical and Actuarial Measures and the Rrole of the Psgchopathy Checklist.British Journal of Psychiatry,177(4),303-311.
  10. Douglas, K. S.,P. R. Kropp(2002).A Prevention-based Paradigm for Violence Risk Assessment: Clinical and Research Applicaitons.Criminal Justice and Behavior,29(5),617-658.
  11. Dutton, D. G.(1995).A Scale for Measureing the Propensity for Abusiveness.Journal of Family Violence,10(2),203-221.
  12. Dutton, D. G.,M. A. Landolt,A. StarzomskiJ,M. Budnarchuk(2001).Validation of the Propensity for Abusiveness Scale in Diverse Male Populations.Journal of Family Violence,16(1),59-73.
  13. Dutton, D. G.,P. R. Kropp(2000).A Review of Domestic Vioence Risk instruments.Trauma, Violence, & Abuse,1(1),171-181.
  14. Dutton, M. A.,D. Dionne,M. Steinman (ed.)(1991).Women Battering: Policy Responses.Cincinnati, OH:Anderson.
  15. Grau, J.,J. Fagan,S. Wexler,C. Schweber (eds.),C. Feinman (eds.)(1985).Criminal Justice Politics and Women: The Aftermath of Legally Mandated Change.New York:Haworth Press.
  16. Hague, G.,A. Mullender,R. Aris(2003).Is Anyone Listening? Accountability and Women Survivors of Domestic Violence.London:Routledge.
  17. Heckert, D. A.,B. W. Gondolf(2004).Battered Women's Perception of Rrisk versus Risk Factors and Instruments in Predictinf Repeat Reassault.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,19(7),778-800.
  18. Heilbmn, K.(1997).Prediction versus Management Models Relevant to Rrisk Assessment: The Importance of Legal Decision-making Context.Law and Human Behavio,21(4),347-359.
  19. Hoyle, C.(2008).Will She be Safe? A Critical Analysis of Risk Assessment in Domestic Violence Cases.Children and Youth Services Review,30(3),323-337.
  20. K. S. Douglas (eds.),C. D. Webster (eds.),S. D. Hart (eds.),D. Eaves (eds.),J. R. P. Ogloff (eds.)(2001).HCR-20 Violence Risk Management Companion Guide.Burnaby, Canada:Simon Fraser University.
  21. Klein, A. R.,B. S. Buzawa (eds.),C. B. Buzawa (eds.)(1996).Do Arrests and Restraining Orders Work?.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
  22. Kropp, P. R.(2004).Some Questions Regarding Spousal Assault Risk Assessment.Violence Against Women,10(6),676-697.
  23. Kropp, P. R.,S. D. Hart(2000).The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA) Guide: Reliability and Validity in Adult Male Offender.Law and Human Behavior,24(1),101-118.
  24. The Maryland Domestic Violence Lethality Screen and Protocol for First Responders
  25. Pence, E. L.,M. F. Shepard (eds.),S. L. Pence (eds.)(1999).Coordinating Community Responses to Domestic Violence: Lessons from Duluth and Beyon.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
  26. Quinsey, V. L.,V. T. Harris,M. F. Rice,C. Cornier(1998).Violent Offenders: Appraising and Managing Rrisk.Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.
  27. Robinson, A. L.(2006).Reducing Repeat Victimization among High-Risk Victims of Domestic Violence: The Benefits of a Coordinated Community Response in Cardiff, Wales.Violence Against Women,12(8),761-788.
  28. Robinson, A. L.,J. Tregidga(2007).The Perceptions of High-risk Victims of Domestic Violence to a Coordinated Community Response in Cardiff, Wales.Violence Against Women,13(11),1130-1148.
  29. Roehi, J.,C. O''Sullivan,D. Webster,J. Campbell(2005).Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment Validation Study: The RAVE Study Practitioner Summary and Recommendations: Validation of Tools for Assessing Risk from Violent intimate Partners.Washington DC:U.S. Department of Justice.
  30. Sudderth, L. K.(2006).An Uneasy Alliance: Law Enforcement and Domestic Violence Victim Advocates in a Rural Area.Feminist Criminology,1(4),329-353.
  31. Walker, L. E.(1979).The Battered Women.New York:Harper & Row.
  32. Weisz, A. N.,R. M. Tolman,D. G. Saunders(2000).Assessing the Risk of Severe Domestic Violence: The Importance of Survivors' Predictions.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,15(1),75-90.
  33. Williams, K. R.,A. B. Houghton(2004).Assessing the Risk of Domestic Violence Reoffending: A Validation Study.Law and Human Behavior,28(4),437-455.
  34. 林明傑(2004)。婚姻暴力加害人再犯危險評估量表建立研究。內政部家庭暴力及性侵害防治委員會委託研究報告。
  35. 林明傑、鄭瑞陸、蔡宗晃、張秀鴛、李文輝(2006)。家庭暴力案件危險分級管理試辦方案之檢驗。社區發展季刊,115,290-308。
  36. 張錦麗、王珮玲、姚淑文、王秋嵐(2007)。宜蘭縣家庭暴力防治安全網計畫研究。宜蘭縣政府委託研究報告。
  37. 張錦麗、王珮玲、柯麗評(2003)。美國杜魯斯家庭暴力社區介入模式的介紹。社區發展季刊,101,320-330。
Times Cited
  1. 陳亞萱(2016)。受暴婦女的創傷經驗與社會反應對創傷後壓力症候群、創傷後成長之影響。中原大學心理學研究所學位論文。2016。1-88。 
  2. 傅莉蓁(2015)。家庭暴力防治社工對危險評估之知能探討-以高雄市親密關係高危機案件為例。屏東科技大學社會工作系學位論文。2015。1-141。 
  3. 劉怡芳(2014)。在保護與處罰之間-探討兒童及少年性侵害加害人處遇服務現況-以三個縣市為例。屏東科技大學社會工作系學位論文。2014。1-614。 
  4. 范爾雯(2011)。實務社會工作者評估家庭暴力被害人之危險情境探討。臺北大學社會工作學系學位論文。2011。1-137。
  5. 呂佳芸(2011)。親密關係受暴女性求助行為分析。臺北大學犯罪學研究所學位論文。2011。1-90。
  6. 趙國妤(2012)。親密關係暴力高危險案件實務介入與處遇之探討。臺灣師範大學社會工作學研究所學位論文。2012。1-123。
  7. 廖雅萍(2012)。桃園縣政府警察局受理家庭暴力通報事件相對人追蹤分析。臺北大學犯罪學研究所學位論文。2012。1-100。
  8. 王於磬(2013)。家庭暴力安全防護網高危機個案解除列管指標再評估之研究~以台中市為例。朝陽科技大學社會工作系學位論文。2013。1-241。
  9. 吳啟安(2014)。家庭暴力高危機個案網絡會議危險管理過程之研究。中正大學犯罪防治學系學位論文。2014。1-263。
  10. 邱蘭媚(2015)。男性親密暴力者「忍」之敘事研究。中正大學犯罪防治學系學位論文。2015。1-195。
  11. 蔣蕙如(2016)。關係一致性與同居經驗對親密關係暴力的影響:對偶分析。臺北大學犯罪學研究所學位論文。2016。1-49。