性侵害防治相關體系處遇智能障礙被害案件在司法上所面臨的困境與需求

The Challenges and Requirements Facing with Judiciary Professionals While Working with Sexual Abuse Victims with Intellectual Disabilities

10.6171/ntuswr2008.17.03

劉文英(Wen-Ying Liou)

智能障礙 ； 性侵害 ； 司法體系 ； 跨專業合作團隊 ； sexual abuse ； intellectual disabilities ； judiciary system ； multidisciplinary team

臺大社會工作學刊

17期（2008 / 06 / 01）

93 - 130

繁體中文

智能障礙者為遭受性侵害的高危險群，然而此類型案件卻容易因智能障礙者的認知與溝通功能低下而不易遭到起訴，本研究旨在探討社政、警政、司法、教育各防治體系處遇智能障礙性侵害被害件時在警政與司法工作所面臨的困境與需求。研究方法採用質性研究法的焦點團體訪談針對52位防治工作人員蒐集資料。研究結果發現針對警政與司法工作，目前防治工作的困境為：(1)智能障礙者的證詞反覆特性影響性侵害防治工作的突破；(2)減述作業未加落實；(3)司法偵訊態度存在迷思；(4)司法偵訊用語不適合智能障礙者的溝通能力；以及(5)智能障礙受害者人權未獲尊重。而其因應的工作需求則為：(1)增加瞭解智能障礙特性的在職訓練；(2)增進偵訊智能障礙者的司法人員態度與環境；(3)加強辦理與參與網絡研習；以及(4)改進司法審理智能障礙被害案件之證據形式。最後文中亦探討了對實務工作的建議。

People with intellectual disabilities are at high-risk of being victims of sexual abuse. However, the cases were not easily prosecuted because of the victims' low communicative function. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore the challenges and requirements facing with judiciary professionals when working with sexual abuse victims with intellectual disabilities. This study employed a qualitative method of focus group interviews to collect data from fifty-two interviewees. The results showed the judiciary challenges of working with people with intellectual disability included the followings: (1) Their disabilities rendered them unable to provide reliable evidence for prosecution; (2) The statement reduction for victims must be implemented; (3) The investigatory attitude of case investigators was not fair for the disabled victims; (4) The investigatory language was too difficult for the victims to understand; and (5) The right of victims with intellectual disabilities was not concerned all through the process of investigation. In addition, four requirements toward judiciary system were arrived to prevent more people with intellectual disability from sexual victimization: (1) Improve the in-service training for judiciary professionals about the characteristics of people with intellectual disabilities; (2) Improve the attitude toward victims and environment during investigation; (3) Take importance on the transaction and participation of multidisciplinary team meetings; and (4) Improve the evidence-gathering work when dealing with victims with intellectual disability. Finally, the suggestions toward practices were discussed in this paper.

1. Aarons, N. M.,Powell, M. B.,Browne, J.(2004).Police perceptions of interviews involving children with intellectual disabilities: A qualitative inquiry.Policing & Society,14,269-278.
2. Baladerian, N.(1991).Sexual abuse of people with developmental disabilities.Sexuality and Disability,9,323-335.
3. Chamberlain, A.,Rauh, J.,Passer, A.,McGrath, M.,Burket, R.(1984).Issues in fertility control for mentally retarded female adolescents: I. Sexual activity, sexual abuse, and contraception.Pediatrics,73,445-450.
4. Fargason, C. A.,Barnes, D.,Schneider, D.,Galloway, B. W.(1994).Enhancing multi-agency collaboration in the management of child sexual abuse.Child Abuse & Neglect,18,859-869.
5. Finkelhor, D.(1987).The trauma of child sexual abuse: two models.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,2,348-366.
6. Furey, E. M.(1994).Sexual abuse of adults with mental retardation: Who and where.Mental Retardation,32,173-180.
7. Goldman, R. L.(1994).Children and youth with intellectual disabilities: Targets for sexual abuse.International Journal of Disability, Development and Education,41,89-102.
8. Keilty, J.,Connelly, G.(2001).Making a statement: An exploratory study of barriers facing women with an intellectual disability when making a statement about sexual assault to police.Disability & Society,16,273-291.
9. Lamb, M. E.(1994).The investigation of child sexual abuse: An interdisciplinary consensus statement.Child Abuse & Neglect,18,1021-1028.
10. McAfee, J. K.,Cockram, J.,Wolfe, P. S.(2001).Police reactions to crimes involving people with mental retardation: A cross-cultural experimental study.Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities,36,160-171.
11. McAfee, J. K.,Musso, S. I.(1995).Police training and citizens with mental retardation.Criminal Justice Review,20,55-65.
12. McCormack, B.,Kavanagh, D.,Caffrey, S.,Power, A.(2005).Investigating sexual abuse: Findings of a 15-year longitudinal study.Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities,18,217-227.
13. Moran-Ellis, J.,Fielding, N.(1996).A national survey of the investigation of child sexual abuse.British Journal of Social Workers,26,337-356.
14. Orelove, F. P.,Hollahan, D. J.,Myles, K. T.(2000).Maltreatment of children with disabilities: Training needs for a collaborative response.Child Abuse & Neglect,24,185-194.
15. Perske, R.(1994).Thoughts on the police interrogation of individuals with mental retardation.Mental Retardation,32,377-380.
16. Saunders, E. J.(1988).A comparative study of attitudes toward child sexual abuse among social work and judicial system professionals.Child Abuse & Neglect,12,83-90.
17. Sobsey, D.,Doe, T.(1991).Patterns of sexual abuse and assault.Sexuality and Disability,9,243-259.
18. Stromsness, M. M.(1993).Sexually abused women with mental retardation: Hidden victims, absent resources.Women and Therapy,14,139-152.
19. Tharinger, D.,Horton, C. B.,Millea, S.(1990).Sexual abuse and exploitation of children and adults with mental retardation and other handicaps.Child Abuse and Neglect,14,301-312.
20. Trute, B.,Adkins, E.,MacDonald, G.(1992).Professional attitudes regarding the sexual abuse of children: Comparing police, child welfare and community mental health.Child Abuse & Neglect,16,359-368.
21. Valenti-Hein, D.,Schwartz, L.(1993).Witness competency in people with mental retardation: Implications for prosecution of sexual abuse.Sexuality and Disability,11,287-294.
22. 內政部(2003)。性侵害案件減少被害人重複陳述作業工作手冊。台北:內政部家庭暴力及性侵害防治委員會。
23. 內政部網頁
24. 內政部網頁
25. 內政部網頁
26. 王燦槐(2005)。性侵害防治中心在司法流程中的角色－減少性侵害被害人重複陳述作業之評析。亞洲家庭暴力與性侵害期刊，1，111-136。
27. 王燦槐(2003)。我國性侵害防治工作之問題與改革－官方性侵害防治的組織設計。社會文化學報，16，41-68。
28. 中華民國九十四年二月五日華總（一）義字第09400017721號令公布
29. 中華民國八十六年一月二十二日華總（一）義字第8600016230號令公布
30. 姚淑文、張錦麗(2004)。「性侵害案件減少被害人重複陳述方案」推動後的結果與未來發展方向。律師雜誌，301，40-54。
31. 高鳳仙(2006)。我國性侵害受害兒童保護之政策回顧與展望。律師雜誌，322，57-75。
32. 黃富源(2005)。我國性犯罪現況與防治對策之分析。國家政策季刊，4，69-99。
33. 劉邦繡(2003)。偵察機關對強制性交案件之偵查作為與限制。警學叢刊，33，131-146。

1. 程雅妤,莊謹鳳,張素惠,王智弘(2021)。性侵害案件中提供司法單位心理諮商報告之倫理考量。輔導與諮商學報，43(2)，89-119。
2. 林育陞(2015)。心理師在司法臨床角色定位。諮商與輔導，355，7-11。
3. 劉文英(2009)。社工員執行智能障礙者性侵害防治工作所面臨的困境與需求。臺大社會工作學刊，19，41-85。
4. 劉文英(2009)。相關防治體系所知覺的教育專業執行防治智能障礙者遭受性侵害工作所面臨的需求。特殊教育學報，29，137-162。
5. (2016)。特殊教育教師知覺的性侵害防治政策執行之困境分析。教育政策論壇，19(2)，125-155。
6. (2018)。我國司法詢問員制度之源起及現況。社區發展季刊，162，82-95。
7. (2019)。性侵害案件減少被害人重複陳述作業方案之反思。社區發展季刊，165，168-180。
8. (2024)。心理師作為證人之本土化探討：性侵害議題出庭作證之倫理。中華輔導與諮商學報，70，37-73。