顧家難顧己：多重關係脈絡下的親密伴侶暴力

Caring family not caring oneself: Intimate partner violence within the context of multi-faceted relations

潘淑滿(Shu-Man, Pan)

親密伴侶暴力 ； 性別權控 ； 家族主義 ； 求助 ； 面子文化 ； Intimate partner violence ； sexual power control ； familism ； help-seeking ； face-saving culture

東吳社會工作學報

40期（2021 / 06 / 01）

1 - 33

繁體中文

國內外對於親密伴侶暴力的性別權力控制論述有些討論，本文嘗試融入臺灣社會文化脈絡，以21位遭受親密伴侶暴力婦女為研究主體，透過訪談法了解受訪者如何詮釋自己的受暴經驗及其求助凸顯的性別權力關係。研究結果發現：受訪者的自我主體受到家族關係影響，在「三從」規範下努力扮演「三好」角色，在多重家族關係下，「自我」往往被犧牲，為了維持「家庭完整」而長期隱忍受暴事實。若求助，則面對排山倒海親情壓力。親密伴侶暴力循環期僅存於婚前，婚後受暴幾乎沒有蜜月期。除此之外，臺灣社會文化讓受訪者尋求協助時，傾向同時尋求正式與娘家系統的雙重協助。本研究歸納結論：（一）臺灣親密伴侶暴力是多重關係下的性別權力控制，（二）受暴婦女因生命週期不同處境也不同，（三）在家族主義與面子文化下容易造成受暴婦女求助的親情困境。

There has been much debate about the concept of sexual power control in regard to Intimate partner violence issue. This article, based on in-depth interviews with 21 battered women in Taiwan, illustrates how battered women interpret their experiences and help-seeking behaviors, and its implications for sexual power relations. The result of this study has demonstrated that even though Taiwan has become a modernized society and the prevention of Intimate partner violence has been implemented for two decades, women's subjectivity is still strongly shaped by the Principle of Three Obedience which pushes women so hard to be a good daughter, wife, mother, and daughter-in-law. During the interview, when women refer themselves there is no ＂I＂ but only ＂we＂ and ＂my family.＂ For these 21 battered women in different life-cycle, original family and family-in-law seems to be a heavy chain that shackles them. Under the context of familism and face-saving culture, most of these 21 battered women endured their husband's violence for many years in order to maintain ＂family integrity.＂ Some ask for helps, but they faced the pressure from families. Different from Western scholars' suggestions, the cycle of Intimate partner violence has almost no honeymoon period after marriage. Besides, these 21 battered women tend to seek helps from both formal and informal assistance. This article concludes that: 1. In Taiwan the Intimate partner violence is surely a sexual power control within multi-faceted systems, 2. The battered women's experience and help-seeking are different in term of on their life-cycle, and 3. Within the contexts of familism and face-saving culture, these battered women often experienced dilemmas for seeking helps.

1. Hsieh, H. F.,Feng, J. Y.,Shu, B. C.(2009).The experiences of Taiwanese women who have experienced domestic violence.Journal of Nursing Research,17(3),153-160.
   連結：
2. 伊慶春(2019)。台灣的家庭變遷：家庭社會學者的研究關懷。近代中國婦女史研究，34，219-254。
   連結：
3. 邱獻輝(2013)。男性的夫妻角色期待與實踐：親密暴力者 vs.無親密暴力者。犯罪學刊，16(2)，61-92。
   連結：
4. 莊曉霞(2012)。原住民社會工作文化能力內涵之初探－以花蓮縣為例。社會政策與社會工作學刊，16(1)，133-182。
   連結：
5. 陳高凌(2001)。義與面子在華人家庭暴力裡的運作及其對治療之啟示。本土心理學研究，15，63-111。
   連結：
6. 黃怡瑾(2001)。婚暴中的權力控制-個人自覺與社會結構的互動歷程。婦女與兩性學刊，12，95-137。
   連結：
7. 潘淑滿(2003)。婚姻暴力的性別政治。女學學誌，15，195-254。
   連結：
8. 潘淑滿,游美貴(2016)。同志伴侶暴力及求助之研究。臺大社會工作學刊，34，129-172。
   連結：
9. 鄭詩穎(2015)。受暴婦女為何無法逃脫？– 從「家庭暴力」到「高壓控管」。中華心理衛生學刊，28，481-497。
   連結：
10. 戴世玫(2016)。臺灣婚姻暴力圖像：從父權家族系統受暴網的觀點出發。社會政策與社會工作學刊，20(2)，43-82。
    連結：
11. Allen, M.(2013).Social Work and Intimate Partner Violence.London, UK:Routledge.
12. Anderson, K. L.(1997).Gender, status, and domestic violence: An integration of feminist and family violence approaches.Journal of Marriage and the Family,59(3),655-669.
13. Bent-Goodley, T. B.(2005).Culture and domestic violence: Transforming knowledge development.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,20(2),195-203.
14. Dobash, R. E.,Dobash, R. P.(1998).Violent men and violent contexts.Rethinking violence against women,Thousand Oaks, CA:
15. Dobash, R. P.,Dobash, R. E.,Wilson, M.,Daly, M.(1992).The myth of sexual symmetry in marital violence.Social Problems,39(1),71-91.
16. Dutton, M. A.,Goodman, L. A.(2005).Coercion in Intimate Partner Violence: Toward a New Conceptualization.Sex Roles: A Journal of Research,52,743-756.
17. Frank, P. B.,O’Sullivan, C. S.(2011).Is domestic violence a “choice”? No, not exactly.The Voice: The Journal of the Battered Women’s Movement,Fall, 10
18. Fulcher, J. A.(2002).Domestic violence and the rights of women in Japan and the United States.Human Rights,29(3),16-17.
19. Hwang, K. K.(1997).Guanxi and Mientze: Conflict resolution in Chinese society.Intercultural Communication Studies,7(1),17-42.
20. Johnson, M. P.(1995).Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women.Journal of Marriage and Family,57(2),283-294.
21. Jones, A.(2001).Woman are vicitms of family violence.Family violence,San Diego:
22. Kim, J. Y.,Sung, K. T.(2000).Conjugal violence in Korean American families: A residue of cultural transition.Journal of Family Violence,15(4),331-345.
23. Kim, S.(2010).Beyond liberal civil society: Confucian familism and relational strangership.Philosophy East and West,60(4),476-498.
24. Krahé, B.,Bieneck, S.,Möller, I.(2005).Understanding Gender and Intimate Partner Violence from an International Perspective.Sex Roles: A Journal of Research,52,807-827.
25. Liu, C. L. J.,Regehr, C.(2009).Power and Control as a Framework for Practice--The Case of Intimate Partner Violence Work in Taiwan.Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention,8(4),381-389.
26. Loke, A. Y.,Wan, M. L. E.,Hayter, M.(2012).The lived experience of women victims of intimate partner violence.Journal of Clinical Nursing,21(15-16),2336-2346.
27. Mitchell, C.,Vanya, M.(2009).Explanatory frameworks of intimate partner violence.Intimate Partner Violence: A Health-Based Perspective,New York, NY:
28. Morrison, K. E.,Luchok, K. J.,Richter, D. L.,Parra-Medina, D.(2006).Factors influencing help-seeking from informal networks among African American victims of intimate partner violence.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,21(11),1493-1511.
29. Rohrbaugh, J. B.(2006).Domestic violence in same-gender relationships.Family Court Review,44(2),287-299.
30. Schwartz, M. D.(1987).Gender and injury in spousal assault.Sociological Focus,20,61-75.
31. Shim, W. S.,Hwang, M. J.(2005).Implications of an arrest in Domestic violence cases: Learning from Korean social workers’ experiences in the U.S..Journal of Family Violence,20(5),313-327.
32. Stark, E.(2007).Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life.New York:Oxford University Press.
33. Straus, M. A.,Gelles, R. J.(1986).Societal change and change in family violence from 1975 to 1985 as revealed by two national surveys.Journal of Marriage and the Family,48,465-479.
34. Tonsing, J. C.(2016).Domestic violence: intersection of culture, gender and context.Journal of immigrant and minority health,18(2),442-446.
35. Wallach, H. S.,Weingram, Z.,Avitan, O.(2010).Attitudes toward domestic violence: A cultural perspective.Journal of interpersonal violence,25(7),1284-1297.
36. Warrier, S.(2008).it's in their culture”: fairness and cultural considerations in domestic violence.Family Court Review,46(3),537-542.
37. Yang, K. S.(1998).Chinese responses to modernization: A psychological analysis.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,1(1),75-97.
38. Yick, A. G.,Early, J. O.(2008).A 16-year examination of domestic violence among Asians and Asian Americans in the empirical knowledge base: A content analysis.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,23(8),1075-1094.
39. Yoshihama, M.(1999).Domestic violence: Japan’s ‘hidden crime’.Japan Quarterly,46(3),76-82.
40. Yoshihama, M.(2005).A web in the patriarchal clan system: tactics of intimate partners in the Japanese sociocultural context.Violence Against Women,11(10),1236-1262.
41. Yoshihama, M.(2000).Policies and services addressing domestic violence in Japan: From non-interference to incremental changes.Women’s Studies International Forum,25(5),541- 553.
42. Yoshihama, M.(2002).The definitional process of domestic violence in Japan: generating official response through action-oriented research and international advocacy.Violence Against Women,8(3),339-366.
43. Yoshioka, M. R.,Dang, Q.(2000).Asian family violence report: A study of Chinese, Cambodian, Korean, South Asian and Vietnamese communities in Massachusetts.Boston:Asian Task Force Against Domestic Violence.
44. 王麗容(1999)。當前校園性騷擾和性侵害本質探討：一個質化研究的分析。社會工作學刊，5，37-62。
45. 林方皓(2001)。另一種沉默－婚姻裡的性暴力。婦女與性別研究通訊，61，17-19。
46. 馬宗潔(2006)。客觀真實和主觀事實之間的對話。應用心理研究，32，207-216。
47. 馬宗潔,曾瀞儀,王海玲,胡雅瓊(2003)。親密伴侶暴力，為何而戰？探討親密伴侶暴力服務的現狀。社區發展季刊，142，156-163。
48. 梁麗清(2016).親密伴侶暴力的性別思考.香港:香港城市大學.
49. 陳秉華,游淑瑜(2001)。臺灣的家庭文化與家庭治療。亞洲輔導學報，8(2)，153-174。
50. 章英華（2015）。台灣社會變遷基本調查計畫 2011 第六期第二次：家庭組(C00222_1)【原始數據】。取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。doi: 10.6141/TW-SRDA-C00222_1-1。
51. 黃光國(2009).儒家關係主義－哲學反思、理論建構與實證研究.臺北:心理出版社.
52. 黃楷婷(2015)。國立屏東科技大學社會工作系所。
53. 葛書倫(2013)。她說？他說？再思親密關係暴力的權控論述：以北投經驗為例。社區發展季刊，142，264-273。
54. 潘淑滿,林東龍,林雅容,陳杏容(2017)。衛生福利部委託研究報告衛生福利部委託研究報告,衛生福利部。
55. 衛生福利部（2019 年 2 月 22 日）。3.1.1 家庭暴力事件通報案件統計，衛生福利部。取自 https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOS/cp-2981-14053-113.html。
56. 羅燦煐(2011)。,內政部家庭暴力及性侵害防治委員會。

1. 羅方妤,張弘潔(2023)。以「兒童蓬勃指數」評估台灣兒童健康福祉之現況。台灣公共衛生雜誌，42(3)，336-347。
2. (2023)。在COVID-19大流行期間及疫後解決親密伴侶暴力問題：專科護理師如何發揮作用。樹德科技大學學報，25(1)，133-140。
3. (2024)。東南亞籍新住民受暴婦女在台灣的動態交織困境。臺大社會工作學刊，49，99-139。