探討多元專業工作者於兒少保護家庭暴力案件之合作共治模式

The Collaboration and Shared Governance Model of Professionals Who Work on Domestic Violence Cases Involving Child and Youth Protection

10.3966/172851862020010057002

張曉佩(Hsiao-Pei Chang)

多元專業 ； 合作共治 ； 兒少保護家庭暴力 ； Collaboration and shared governance ； domestic violence involving child and youth protection ； multiple professional

中華輔導與諮商學報

57期（2020 / 01 / 01）

17 - 49

繁體中文

本研究主要目的在探討專業工作者於涉及兒少保護家暴案件中進行合作的機制內涵以及影響合作的因素。本研究共邀請21位在政府部門與社區機構執行兒少保護與家庭暴力防治業務，有3年以上工作經驗的專業工作者參與研究。研究者透過個別訪談蒐集資料，並採用紮根理論分析法的開放編碼、主軸編碼與核心編碼等步驟進行資料分析。研究結果發現影響專業工作者進行合作的核心因素是專業工作者的動能，包括：採取行動的自主性與彈性、對問題的知覺、以及發展信任。採取行動的自主性與彈性，包括：對各個專業權責的瞭解、法律倫理規範與實務現況間的彈性、以及個案複雜度與案量管控。對問題的知覺，包括：訓練背景與專業知識、實務經驗、個人價值觀與個人風格、以及多元文化視框。發展信任，包括：肯定多元的貢獻、透明度與清楚明白的溝通、以及支持與相互性。研究參與者認為可行的合作機制，是由社政單位統籌召開以案家為核心的網絡會議，服務個案與案家的所有專業工作者都必須參與會議，在會議中落實專業角色任務，以達展開有效的對話、資訊分享、資源連結與形成處遇共識等功能，而此會議在開案前、執行期與結案時都需召開以兼具及時性與延續性。依據研究結果與討論，研究者提出持續檢視與覺察身為專業工作者的動能、出席並落實網絡會議的實質意義與價值、以及裝備走出舒適圈的勇氣等建議。

The research showed that domestic violence experience has negative impact on individuals, including immediate impact (emotional and behavioral disturbance) and long-term impact (depression, low self-esteem, poor academic achievement, PTSD, and substance abuse). As domestic violence episodes are associated with child and youth protection issues, the complexity of the intervention process will be increased. The nature of domestic violence is multicultural, and many of the services and interventions provided are not entirely suitable for clients or relevant to their day-to-day life experiences. For example, the collaboration between child protection and domestic violence sectors is often problematic. Indeed, the two sectors operate relatively independently and with little integration. However, it is widely recognized that the two sectors need to work more closely together to enhance both adult victims' and children's safety. Since no single agency or professional is able to deal with all the needs of a family alone, the premise of this article is focused on the collaboration and shared governance of professionals to offer comprehensive interventions in order to enhance the likelihood to satisfy the needs of clients and families. The collaboration and shared governance is defined as multiple professional workers from different backgrounds working in cohesion with clients, families, and communities to deliver the highest quality of service. Research and documents have shown that multiple professional collaboration models are not just effective but are also essential for competent, cost-effective, culturally responsive mental health care. The highest quality of service means that multiple professional workers provide coordinated, appropriate, consistent responses aimed at enhancing victim's safety, reducing secondary victimization, and holding abusers to be accountable for their violence. This study aimed at exploring the factors that influence multiple professional workers dealing with the domestic violence involved with child protection and the collaboration and shared governance model. The researcher recruited and invited 21 professionals with over three years of working experience and whose specialty was focused on domestic violence interventions and preventions in government or community agencies. Individual interviews were conducted to gather data, and the data was then analyzed based on the grounded theory and processed by the sequential extractions of open coding, axial coding, and core coding. During the analysis, the core theme was identified as energy of professionals which included three categories: autonomy and flexibility to act, perspectives on problems, and trust development. Autonomy and flexibility to act included understanding the role of each professional, the flexibility between rules/ethics and practice, and the case complexity and caseload. The perspectives on problem included training and professional background, practice experience, personal value and style, and multicultural viewpoint. Trust development included appreciating diverse contributions, transparency and clear communication, and mutual support. Participants reported that the professionals of social welfare in the government should be the one to organize network meetings based on families' needs. All of the professionals who provide services to the family should attend network meetings and perform the necessary tasks for their role. The functions of the network meetings should include facilitating healthy conversations, sharing information, connecting resources, and reaching an intervention agreement. When a suspected case is reported and evaluated on whether it should be open, the network meeting should be held immediately. Network meetings may also be held during the period of intervention or during the moment that the case is evaluated to be closed. The meeting should be held immediately and continuously. The results raised several important implications for training and clinical work. The recommendations from the study include continuing to inspect and be aware of their own energy level as professionals, participating in the network meeting and implementing its true value and meaning, and instilling courage for professionals to walk out of their comfort zone. These recommendations are essential for domestic violence and child protection professionals to collaborate with each other in the future.

1. 沈瓊桃, C. T(2010)。暴力的童年、堅韌的青年：目睹婚暴暨受虐青年復原力之探討。中華輔導與諮商學報，27，115-160。
   連結：
2. 沈瓊桃, C. T.(2008)。婚暴併兒虐服務整合的挑戰與模式初探。社會政策與社會工作學刊，12(1)，51-90。
   連結：
3. 徐惠蘋, H. P.(2016)。探索兒少保護案件在教育系統與社政系統間的合作樣貌。學校行政雙月刊，103，140-159。
   連結：
4. 張淑芬, S. F.(2015)。心理師從事家庭暴力暨性侵害類社區諮商之跨專業系統合作能力初探研究。教育心理學報，47(1)，23-43。
   連結：
5. 張曉佩, H. P.(2016)。心理衛生專業工作者的合作共治。輔導季刊，52(1)，67-76。
   連結：
6. 陳竹上, J. S.,黃有志, Y. J.(2014)。壞先生是否也是壞爸爸？：家庭暴力防治法第四十三條之理論與實證分析。高雄師大學報，36，77-90。
   連結：
7. Banks, D.,Hazen, A. L.,Coben, J. H.,Wang, K.,Griffith, J. D.(2009).Collaboration between child welfare agencies and domestic violence service providers: Relationship with child welfare policies and practices for addressing domestic violence.Children and Youth Services Review,31,497-505.
8. Bent-Goodley, T. B.(2004).Perceptions of domestic violence: A dialogue with African American women.Health & Social Work,29(4),307-316.
9. Bridges, D. R.,Davidson, R. A.,Odegard, P. S.,Maki, I. V.,Tomkowiak, J.(2011).Interprofessional collaboration: Three best practice models of interprofessional education.Medical Education Online,16,6035.
10. Bromfield, L.,Higgins, D.(2005).National comparison of child protection systems.Child Abuse Prevention Issues,22
11. Bryan, J.,Henry, L.(2012).A model for building school-family-community partnerships: Principles and process.Journal of Counseling and Development,90(4),408-420.
12. Campbell, S.,Stowe, K.,Ozanne, E.(2011).Interprofessional practice and decision support: An organizational framework applied to a mental health setting.Journal of Interprofessional Care,25,423-427.
13. Chanmugam, A.,Kemter, A. J.(2015).Educational services for children in domestic violence shelters: Perspectives of shelter personnel.Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal,32,405-415.
14. Cheers, B.,Derracott, R.,Lonne, B.(2007).Social care practice in rural communities.Leichhardt, Australia:The Federation Press.
15. D'Amour, D.,Oandasan, I.(2005).Interprofessionality as the field of interprofessional practice and interprofessional education: An emerging concept.Journal of Interprofessional Care,19(Suppl. 1),8-20.
16. Edleson, J. L.(2004).Should childhood exposure to adult domestic violence be defined as child maltreatment under the law?.Protecting children from domestic violence: Strategies for community intervention,New York, NY:
17. Francis, K.,Chapman, Y.,Sellick, K.,James, A.,Miles, M.,Jones, J.,Grant, J.(2012).The decision-making processes adopted by rurally located mandated professionals when child abuse or neglect is suspected.Contemporary Nurse,41(1),58-69.
18. Garcia, J.,McGuire-Kuletz, M.,Froelich, R.,Dave, P.(2008).Testing a transcultural model of ethical decision making with rehabilitation counselors.Journal of Rehabilitation,74(3),21-26.
19. Haas, S. M.,Bauer-Leffler, S.,Turley, E.(2011).Evaluation of cross-disciplinary training on the co-occurrence of domestic violence and child victimization: Overcoming barriers to collaboration.Journal of Health and Human Services Administration,34(3),352-386.
20. Harris, W. W.,Lieberman, A. F.,Marans, S.(2007).In the best interests of society.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,48(3),392-411.
21. Head, B.,Alford, J.(2015).Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management.Administration & Society,47(6),711-739.
22. Humphreys, C.(2008).Problems in the system of mandatory reporting of children living with domestic violence.Journal of Family Studies,14,228-239.
23. Huxham, C.,Vangen, S.(2004).Doing things collaboratively: Realizing the advantage or succumbing to inertia?.Organizational Dynamics,33,190-201.
24. Jaatinen, P.,Erkolahti, R.,Asikainen, P.(2005).Networking family counselling services: Developing psychosocial support for school children.Journal of Interprofessional Care,19,294-295.
25. James, K.(2010).Domestic violence within refugee families: Intersecting patriarchal culture.The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy,31(3),275-284.
26. King, N.,Ross, A.(2003).Professional identities and interprofessional relations: Evaluation of collaborative community schemes.Social Work in Health Care,38,51-72.
27. Laing, L.,Irwin, J.,Toivonen, C.(2012).Across the divide: Using research to enhance collaboration between mental health and domestic violence services.Australian Social Work,65(1),120-135.
28. Laming, H.(2003).The Victoria Climbie Inquiry. Report of an Inquiry by Lord Laming.London, England:The Stationery Office.
29. Lawson, G.,Myers, J. E.(2011).Wellness, professional quality of life, and career-sustaining behaviors: What keeps us well?.Journal of Counseling and Development,89(2),163-171.
30. Lee, M. Y.,Teater, B.,Hsu, K. S.,Greene, G. J.,Fraser, J. S.,Solovey, A. D.,Grove, D.(2013).System collaboration with schools and treatment of severely emotionally disturbed children or adolescents.Children & Schools,35,155-168.
31. Lowe, F.,O’Hara, S.(2000).Multi-disciplinary team working in practice: managing the transition.Journal of Interprofessional Care,14(3),169-279.
32. Lutgendorf, M. A.,Snipes, M. A.,Rau, T.,Busch, J. M.,Zelig, C. M.,Magann, E. F.(2012).Reports to the navy's family advocacy program: Impact of removal of mandatory reporting for domestic violence.Military Medicine,177,702-708.
33. McIntosh, J.,Deacon-Wood, H.(2002).McIntosh, J., & Deacon-Wood, H. (2002). Point of contact: Responding to children and domestic violence . Research Foundations for Front Line Responses. Relationships Australia and Partnerships Against Domestic Violence, Canberra..
34. Mellin, E. A.(2009).Unpacking interdisciplinary collaboration in expanded school mental health: A conceptual model for developing the evidence base.Advances in School Mental Health Promotion,2,4-14.
35. National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges(1999).Effective intervention in domestic violence and child maltreatment cases: Guidelines for policy and practice.Reno, NV:National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.
36. Ødegård, A.,Strype, J.(2009).Perceptions of interprofessional collaboration within child mental health care in Norway.Journal of Interprofessional Care,23,286-296.
37. Osofsky, J. D.,Rovaris, M.,Hammer, J. H.,Dickson, A.,Freeman, N.,Aucoin, K.(2004).Working with police to help children exposed to violence.Journal of Community Psychology,32,593-606.
38. Potito, C.,Day, A.,Carson, E.,O'Leary, P.(2009).Domestic violence and child protection: Partnerships and collaboration.Australian Social Work,62(3),369-387.
39. Radford, L.,Hester, M.(2006).Mothering through domestic violence.London, England:Jessica Kingsley Publication.
40. Rothenberg, P. S.(ed.)(1998).Race, class, and gender in the United States.New York, NY:St. Martin's Press.
41. Scott, D. A.(2005).Inter-organisational collaboration in family-centred practice: A framework for analysis and action.Australian Social Work,58,132-141.
42. Secker, J.,Hill, K.(2001).Broadening the partnerships: Experiences of working across community agencies.Journal of Interprofessional Care,15,341-350.
43. Staggs, S. L.,White, M. L.,Schewe, P. A.,Davis, E. B.,Dill, E. M.(2007).Changing systems by changing individuals: The incubation approach to systems change.American Journal of Community Psychology,39,365-379.
44. Tehee, M.,Esqueda, C. W.(2008).American Indian and European American women's perceptions of domestic violence.Journal of Family Violence,23,25-35.
45. Thomassy, C. S.,McShea, C. S.(2001).Shifting gears: Jump-start interdisciplinary patient care.Nursing Management,32(5),40-44.
46. Willumsen, E.,Hallberg, L.(2003).Interprofessional collaboration with young people in residential care: Some professional perspectives.Journal of Interprofessional Care,17,389-400.
47. World Health Organization(2010).,未出版
48. 行政院衛生福利部（2019）：家庭暴力事件通報案件統計。2019年8月28日取自https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOPS/lp-1303-105.html。 [Ministry of Health and Welfare (2019). Statistics of reporting cases of domestic violence . Retrieve from: https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOPS/lp-1303-105.html]
49. 吳芝儀（譯）,廖梅花（譯）,Strauss, A.,Corbin, J.(2001).紮根理論研究方法.嘉義:濤石.
50. 林淑娥, S. O.(2000)。台北=Taipei，國立臺灣大學社會學研究所=National Taiwan University。

1. (2024).Counseling Psychologists' Interprofessional Collaboration with Social Workers: An Exploration of Grounded Theory.教育心理學報,55(4),635-659.
2. (2024)。光與暗的整合：社會正義取向諮商心理師專業耗竭經驗及調適歷程之探究。臺灣諮商心理學報，12(1)，1-33。