強制戒癮家暴加害人飲酒經驗、戒癮態度及暴力行為之研究

A Study of Domestic Violence Batterers in Connection with the Drinking History, Violent Behaviors and Attitudes towards Addiction Intervention of Alcohol Abusing

10.30074/FJMH.200512_18(4).0002

沈慶鴻(Ching-Hung Shen)；郭豐榮(Feng-Jung Kuo)

家庭暴力加害人處遇計畫 ； 酒癮 ； 戒酒癮治療 ； domestic violence intervention program ； alcoholism ； alcohol rehabilitation therapy

中華心理衛生學刊

18卷4期（2005 / 12 / 01）

31 - 53

繁體中文

本文針對經法院判決需參與「加害人處遇計畫」「戒（酒）癮治療」之家暴加害人，進行飲酒經驗、酒精和暴力關聯性、「酒癮者」角色的自我認定及對戒癮團體期待等部份的了解。研究發現多數的受訪者皆有長期飲酒的習慣，不過他們皆不認為自己是「酒癮者」，並認為戒癮是個人意願和意志力的問題，強迫性的戒癮治療是沒有效果的；不過受訪者在酒精與暴力相關性的看法上，則呈現相當分歧的意見，部份受訪者堅持酒精與暴力行為完全無關、部份受訪者則認為酒精與暴力雖無直接的關係，但卻具有催化暴力行為、降低理性功能的作用。最後，研究者還針對研究相關之議題和結果進行討論。

This research was conducted to gain a better understanding of batterers enrolled through court judgment in alcohol rehabilitation therapy as part of domestic violence intervention programs. Data were collected on their history of drinking, their perspective about the correlation between alcohol and violence, their self-identification as ”alcoholics,” as well as their expectations towards the rehabilitation groups. The study found that most of the interviewees had a long history of drinking, however they did not consider themselves to be ”alcoholics” and furthermore, they believed that quitting an addiction was a question of individual desire and willpower, in other word, imposed rehabilitation therapies remains ineffective. However, interviewees expressed diverging opinions in terms of the correlation between alcohol and violence. Some interviewees insisted that there was no correlation whatsoever between alcohol and violence, while some advanced that although alcohol does not have a direct relation to violence, it nonetheless has a catalytic effect on violent behaviors and lowers one's ability to act rationally. The research paper concludes with observations and discussions on the topic of the study, as well as its findings.

1. 婚姻暴力之治療方案－以再犯預防及現實療法為取向之認知行為療法：個別及團體輔導使用說明
   連結：
2. Berns, S. B.,Jacobson, N. S.,Gottman, J. M.(1999).Demand/withdraw interaction patterns between different types batterers and their spouse.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy,25(3),337-348.
3. Field, C. A.,Caetano, R.,Nelson, S.(2004).Alcohol and violence related cognitive risk factors associated with the perpetration of intimate partner violence.Journal of Family Violence,19(4),249-253.
4. Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Mid-Atlantic Addiction Training Institute, MAATI
5. Herbert, E.,McCannell, K.(1997).Talking back: Six first nations women`s stories of recovery from childhood sexual abuse and addiction.Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health,16(2),51-68.
6. Jiliet, B.(1999).The impact of a batterer`s program on battered women.Violence Against Women,5(1),25-42.
7. Jouriles, E. N.,Murphy, C. M.,O`Leary K. D.(1989).Interspousal aggression, marital discord and child problems.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,57,453-455.
8. Leonard, K.,Jacob, T.(1988).Handbook of Family Violence.New York:Plenum.
9. Mankowski, E. S.,Haaken, J.,Silvergleid, C. S.(2000).Collateral damage: An analysis of the achievements and unintended consequences of batterer intervention program and discourse.Journal of Family Violence,17(2),167-183.
10. Mathews, D. J.(1995).Foundations for violence-free living: A step-by-step guide to facilitating men`s domestic abuse groups.Saint Paul:Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.
11. Muehlenhard, C. L.,Goggins, M. F.,Jones. J. M.,Satterfield A. T.(1991).Sexuality of Close Relationships.Lawrence Erlbaum.
12. Paymar, M.(2000).Violence no more: Helping men end domestic abuse.Hunter House.
13. Rosenbaum, A.,O`Leary, K D.(1981).Children: The unintended victims of marital violence.American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,51(4),692-699.
14. Rosenbaum, A,Maiuro, R. D.(1990).Treatment of Family Violence: A Sourcebook.New York:John Wiley & Sons.
15. Stosny, S.(1994).Shadows of the heart: A dramatic video for the treatment resistance of spouse abusers.Social Work,39(6),686-694.
16. 內政部(2002)。內政部家庭暴力防治委員會第十一次委員會議記錄。台北:內政部。
17. 王增勇(2001)。建構以部落為主體的原住民家庭暴力防制體系－加拿大經驗。全國原住民健康會議。
18. 沈方維(2000)。有關家庭暴力加害人處遇計畫保護令之核發及落實。全國律師，4(11)，29-37。
19. 沈慶鴻(2001)。保護令制度之實施對台北市受虐婦女處境影響之探討。台北市政府社會局委託研究。
20. 沈慶鴻、郭豐榮(2003)。家庭暴力加害人之保護令經驗和處遇計畫之研究。性別、權力研討會
21. 林美足(2002)。國立成功大學行為學研究所。
22. 家庭暴力防治類：暴力類型和侵害類型分析
23. 陳婷蕙(1997)。東海大學社會工作研究所。
24. 劉仲冬(2001)。家庭暴力加害人處遇計畫執行現況調查研究。台北市政府社會局九十年度婦女議題委託研究案。
25. 鄭瑞隆、王文中(2002)。家庭暴力加害人特質與處遇評估工具之研究。內政部委託研究報告。
26. 謝臥龍、吳慈恩、黃志中(2003)。家庭暴力相對人裁定前鑑定制度之評估。內政部委託研究報告。

1. 陳亮晴,柯雅麗,林根弘(2022)。酒癮與創傷經驗。諮商與輔導，436，9-11+17。
2. 劉金明、陳民虹(2008)。婚姻暴力家事調解案例報告及婚姻暴力的處理。臺灣家庭醫學雜誌，18(3)，191-197。
3. 劉姿妤,解景然(2019)。焦點解決短期治療在伴侶暴力酒癮相對人之探討與應用。諮商與輔導，408，32-35。
4. 邱獻輝(2017)。酒精使用改變量表（親密暴力版）編製研究。家庭教育與諮商學刊，21，33-65。
5. 邱獻輝(2017)。融入戒酒處遇的親密暴力強制諮商團體成效研究。臺灣諮商心理學報，5(1)，151-175。
6. (2007)。非自願性案主與社會工作教育。社區發展季刊，120，191-207。
7. (2012)。實施家庭暴力加害人關心訪視成效之研究：以嘉義市兩位個案研究為例。社區發展季刊，138，292-310。
8. (2013)。喝酒─被低估的雄性暴力。社區發展季刊，142，251-263。
9. (2013)。以「安全場域」概念因應親密暴力案件危機。社區發展季刊，142，126-135。