香港、台灣家事調解制度比較研究―以家庭暴力事件爲中心

Comparative Study of Family Mediation in Cases Involving Domestic Violence between Hong Kong and Taiwan

10.6350/JSSP.200906.0247

賴月蜜(Emily Yueh-Mi Lai)

家事調解 ； 訴訟外替代性爭議處理 ； 家庭暴力 ； 離婚 ； 兒童最佳利益 ； family mediation ； ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution ； domestic violence ； divorce ； the best interest of the child

人文及社會科學集刊

21卷2期（2009 / 06 / 01）

247 - 289

繁體中文

家事調解的介入，係因應家事案件的特殊性，跳脫家人對簿公堂、法庭相爭愁更愁的困境，使離婚後的財產及兒童監護等問題，以訴訟外的方式加以解決，藉由中立、公正的調解委員的協助，減低夫妻雙方的憎恨及怨懟，使爲人父母者正視孩子的需求，能有所瞭解兒童的無助與無力，提升父母親問之溝通，能共同協調出親職合作的計劃，以疏減兒童介於父母親爭吵的痛苦，能及早適應父母親離婚後，所帶來的生活上變動。 本研究採質性研究，以訪談法及比較法，針對14位香港與台灣家事調解委員有處理家庭暴力經驗者進行訪談，提出九點研究結論與建議：1．香港、台灣二地家事調解發展的同與異，台灣積極努力向前進。2．台灣應建立家事調解專業資格認定標準。3．加強家庭暴力專業訓練。4．研擬家庭暴力處理準則及篩檢系統。5．統整各法院的優點，建構本土化標準處理流程。6．擴大法院審判功能，提供多元性服務，協助當事人徹底解決問題。7．建構社區資源之運用與聯結。8．發展社區家事調解―提供及早、多元的家庭服務。9．加強社會法治宣導及倡導工作。

Owing to the nature of family disputes, it is not suitable for family members to fight each other in a Family Court. The system of family mediation is non-judicial devices and one kind of ADR (alternative dispute resolution). The mediator is neutral and impartial between the parties, tries to reduce their animosity, and reminds parents to focus on the best interests of the child. The mediator enhances the amicable nature of divorces while discussing the issues of property and custody, and encourages them to cooperate in parenting plans. The study adopted qualitative research methods, including interviewing and comparative methods. The 14 interviewees are family mediators in Hong Kong and Taiwan. They have experience dealing with family mediation involving domestic violence. The conclusions and suggestions are as follows: Firstly, the development of Taiwan's family mediation is similar to Hong Kong's, as learned family mediation professional from Hong Kong. Secondly, Taiwan should set up the qualification standards for family mediators. Thirdly, family mediators should have enhanced training on domestic violence. Fourth, Taiwan should develop a domestic violence mediation screening protocol. Fifth, Taiwan's Court system should develop local family mediation model. Sixth, Taiwan's Family Court should provide multiple services. Seventh, family mediators should have connections to community resources. Eighth, Taiwan should develop community family mediation. Ninth, the government should promote and advocate the legal system for family mediation.

1. Ackerman, M. J.(1995).Clinician's Guide to Child Custody Evaluations.New York:John Wiley & Sons.
2. Beck, C. J. A.,B. D. Sales(2001).Family Mediation-Facts, Myths, and Future Prospects.Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.
3. Chan, F. Y. L.(1999).Unravelling the Riddle of the Decision to Divorce through the Narrative Accounts of Divorced Women-An Attempt on an Integrated Model of Divorce Decision Process to Inform Practice.Hong Kong:Department of Social Work & Social Administration, The University of Hong Kong.
4. Charlesworth, S.,J. N. Turner,L. Foreman(2000).Disrupted Families-The Law.Sydney:The Federation Press.
5. Clapp, G.(2000).Divorce and New Beginnings-A Complete Guide to Recovery, Solo Parenting, Co-parenting, and Stepfamilies.New York:John Wiley & Sons.
6. Coogler, O. J.(1978).Structured Mediation in Divorce Settlement-A Handbook for Marital Mediators.Toronto:Lexington Books.
7. Cummings, E. M.,P. Davies(1994).Children and Marital Conflict-The Impact of Family Dispute and Resolution.New York:The Guilford Press.
8. Drapkin, R.,F. Bienenfeld,A. E. Craig (ed.)(1985).Divorce Mediation-Perspectives on the Field.New York:The Haworth Press.
9. Ellis, D.,N. Stuckless(2006).Domestic Violence, Dove, and Divorce Mediation.Family Court Review,44(4),658-671.
10. Emery, R. E.,R. A. Thompson (eds.),P. R. Amato (eds.)(1999).The Post- divorce Family-Children, Parenting, and Society.London:Sage.
11. Firestone, G.,R.T. McNeal,H. E. Starnes(2004).Mediating Judicial Policy: Successful Mediation of a Family Court Rule on Domestic Violence and Mediation.Family Court Review,42(1),128-140.
12. Flynn, D.(2005).The Social Worker as Family Mediator: Balancing Power in Cases Involving Family Violence.Australian Social Work,58(4),407-418.
13. Forgatch, M. S.,G. R. Patterson,J. A. Ray,E. M. Hetherington (eds.),E. A. Blechman (eds.)(1996).Stress, Coping, and Resiliency in Children and Families.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Gibson, D.(2001).Mediation and Family Law in Australia.Growth and Integration-International Conference on NPO and Child Welfare in the 27th Century,Taipei:
15. Goldenberg, H.,I. Goldenberg(1998).Counseling Today's Families.CA:Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
16. Haynes, J. M.,S. Charlesworth(1996).The Fundamentals of Family Mediation.Sydney:The Federation Press.
17. Holstein, J. A.,J. F. Gubrium,D. Silverman (ed.)(1997).Qualitative Research-Theory, Method and Practice.London:Sage.
18. Irving, H. H. (ed.)(2002).Family Mediation: Theory and Practice with Chinese Families.Hong Kong:Hong Kong University Press.
19. Irving, H. H.,M. Benjamin(1995).Family Mediation-Con temporary Issues.California:Sage.
20. Kwan, R. W. H.,H. H. Irving (ed.)(2002).Family Mediation-Theory and Practice with Chinese Families.Hong Kong:Hong Kong University Press.
21. Maxwell, J. P.(1999).Mandatory Mediation of Custody in the Face of Domestic Violence: Suggestions for Courts and Mediators.Family and Conciliation Courts Review,37(3),335-355.
22. Mederos, F.,M. F. Shepard (eds.),E. L. Pence (eds.)(1999).Coordinating Community Responses to Domestic Violence: Lessons from Duluth and Beyond.London:Sage.
23. Michigan Supreme Court(2006).Domestic Violence and Child Abuse/Neglect Screening for Domestic Relations Mediation-Model Screening Protocol.Michigan:Office of Dispute Resolution, State Court Administrative Office, Michigan Supreme Court.
24. Mime, A. L.,J. Folberg (eds.),A. L. Milne (eds.),P. Salem (eds.)(2004).Divorce and Family Mediation-Models, Techniques, and Application.New York:The Guilford Press.
25. Moore, C. W.(2003).The Mediation Process-Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
26. Parkinson, L.(1997).Family Mediation.London:Sweet & Maxwell.
27. Price, S. J.,P. C. Mckenry(1986).Divorce.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
28. Ptacek, J.(1999).Battered Women in the Courtroom-The Power of Judicial Responses.Boston:Northeastern University Press.
29. Salius, J. A.,D. S. Maruzo,J. Folberg (eds.),A. L. Milne (eds.)(1988).Divorce Mediation-Theory and Practice.New York:The Guilford Press.
30. Sharp, S.,H. Cowie(1998).Counselling and Supporting-Children in Distress.London:Sage.
31. Stevenson, M. R.,K. N. Black(1995).How Divorce Affects Offspring.IA:Wm. C. Brown Communication.
32. Sullivan, P. L.(2005).Culture, Divorce, and Family Mediation.Family Courts Review,43(1),109-123.
33. Taylor, A.(2002).The Handbook of Family Dispute Resolution—Mediation Theory and Practice.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
34. Teyber, E.(2001).Helping Children Cope with Divorce.IN:John Wiley & Sons.
35. Thoennes, N.,P. Salem,J. Person(1995).Mediation and Domestic Violence Current Policies and Practices.Family and Conciliation Courts Review,33(1),6-29.
36. Walczak, Y.,S. Burns(1984).Divorce-The Child's Point of View.London:Harper & Row.
37. 王葉翠芬、周小玲主編(2005)。香港家事調解專業手冊。香港:香港公教婚姻輔導會。
38. 司法院(2007)。調解專題。司法周刊，1330，1。
39. 林滿馨編著、趙文宗編著(2000)。香港法律與社會工作。香港:進一步多媒體有限公司。
40. 邱聯恭(2000)。程序選擇權論。台北:三民書局。
41. 香港法律改革委員會(2003)。排解家庭糾紛程序。香港:香港法律改革委員會。
42. 許翠玲(2007)。另類調解結果―裁判後的監督會面交往。司法周刊，1330，70-71。
43. 郭麗安(2004)。離婚調解諮商模式的反省與思考―台中家事法庭的經驗。家事商談研討會，台北:
44. 陳玉完(2006)。家事調解之檢討與展望－司法行政推展家事調解新制週年經驗分享（上）。司法周刊，1298，2-3。
45. 彭南元(2002)。論家事案件採心理諮詢服務之可行性。司法周刊，1102，2。
46. 趙文宗編著、林滿馨編著(2000)。香港法律與社會工作。香港:進一步多媒體有限公司。
47. 趙文宗、李秀華、林滿馨(2004)。中國內地／香港婚姻法實務。香港:進一步多媒體有限公司。
48. 盧夢鳴、周小玲主編(2005)。香港家事調解專業手冊。香港:香港公教婚姻輔導會。
49. 賴月蜜(2005)。博士論文(博士論文)。暨南國際大學社會政策與社會工作學系。
50. 賴月蜜、國立台北教育大學國際會議廳(2006)。論家庭教育對紛爭處理的重要性－從我國推展家事商談與家事調解服務的困境談起。家庭新圖像的前瞻與挑戰學術研討會，台北:
51. 謝靜慧(2005)。探尋家事調解新方向－以臺灣士林地方法院家事法庭處理家事調解經驗出發。全國律師月刊，9(8)，13-23。

1. 蔡琳(2020)。家事調解制度中的心理諮商專業：以離婚家事調解為例。諮商與輔導，419，26-29。
2. 潘淑滿、胡育瑄、李姿佳、宋名萍(2016)。家庭暴力家事調解服務之經驗與策略─以台北、士林地方法院為例。臺灣社會工作學刊，16，119-166。
3. 邱雅芳、李惠娟(2015)。「家事商談服務使用者的經驗探討」－以兒盟家事商談服務為例。臺灣社會工作學刊，15，81-110。
4. 翟宗悌、鄔佩麗、王佩辰(2017)。善了！心理諮詢師在離婚調解中的服務敘事。輔導與諮商學報，38(2)，1-24。
5. (2018)。社會工作人員參與家事調解的常見議題與應用工具箱之探討。靜宜人文社會學報，12(1)，205-242。
6. (2023)。當諮商心理師進入法院：心理諮商專業在家事司法中之多元實踐及展望。輔導季刊，59(4)，31-42。