English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88613/118155 (75%)
Visitors : 23470465      Online Users : 9
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/56909


    Title: 社會工作者對親屬寄養服務形式觀點之研究
    The study of the form of kinship foster care from the point of view of social workers.
    Authors: 彭裕婷
    Peng, Yu Ting
    Contributors: 謝美娥
    彭裕婷
    Peng, Yu Ting
    Keywords: 親屬寄養
    寄養
    安置評估
    kinship foster care
    foster care
    placement assessment
    Date: 2009
    Issue Date: 2013-02-01 16:57:31 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 親屬寄養的重要性日益彰顯,但政府主管機關對親屬寄養之法律定義及制度運作仍不夠明確。本研究係以美國親屬寄養模式為架構,期待透過對社工員質性訪談與個案說明,瞭解國內親屬寄養之機制運作與實務內涵,並對親屬寄養之制度建立與未來更進一步研究方向提出建議。

    在本研究中,社工員一致認為:「有安置需求的孩童,經過專業人員評估後,安置於親屬家庭中生活」,通常就認定為「親屬寄養」。我們將目前國內「親屬寄養」實際個案與美國親屬寄養模式相較後,發現彼此頗多類似之處,當然其中亦有國情的差異存在。

    社工員指出,親屬寄養具有:血緣關係親近、降低孩童創傷與疏離感;安置環境穩定、避免孩童經歷多次重複安置;生活經驗常態、降低孩童不確定性與焦慮感;同根生歸屬感,保留文化脈絡及尊重原有生活型態等優勢。但無可避免「親屬寄養」在實務運作仍有許多待克服之處,包括:受到來自原生家庭的干擾;決定親屬寄養之決策者與執行者的落差;原生家庭與親屬間關係不和睦;原生家庭重建與管理監督困難等,仍應予個別化考量,此亟需大家共同努力改善。

    社工員強烈建議,政府站在主管機關立場,應積極建立一個親屬寄養完善的運作機制,並由公部門持續介入管理與監督,以發揮社會安定功能。因此,建立一套包含審核的標準、寄養補助金的規劃、教育輔導制度的建立、以及定期追蹤評估實施績效的完整機制,應是目前社會安定政策當務之急。

    本研究係為一探索性研究,彙整社工員的實務經驗與觀點,希冀為親屬寄養的制度化提供具體之建議。然而,在親屬寄養推行後亦可能會產生某些非預期的效果,政策制訂者應預先考量及準備,以建構較適切之親屬寄養服務模式。
    The importance of kinship foster care has gained more attention recently; however, the legal definition and system operation of kinship foster care are still not elaborated clearly enough by government authorities. Using the kinship foster care model of the United States as a pattern, and through interview with social workers and case description, this study aims to explore the system operation and core concept of kinship foster care in Taiwan, and further make suggestions about the system establishment and research on kinship foster care.

    In this study, social workers agreed that "placing the children with placement needs in the kinship family after an assessment” is identified as kinship foster care service. After comparing the domestic cases of kinship foster care and the kinship foster care model of United States, many similarities, and some structural differences between the two countries were found.

    The social workers point out that the kinship foster care was better, and has the advantages of consanguinity, reduction of trauma and alienation. Stable placement environment which avoids re-entry placement. Similar life experience which reduces child’s uncertainty and anxiety, and the sense of belonging as well as retaining the cultural context and respect of the original lifestyle. Nevertheless, inevitably kinship foster care has problems in practice as well, which includes interference from original family, the gap between policy makers and executors of kinship foster care, discord between the original family and relatives, and difficulties of reconstruction and management from the original family. Besides, individual case differences should also be considered. These issues also need to be solved eagerly.

    The social workers strongly recommend that the government should actively create a better mechanism of kinship foster care, and manage and supervise it continuously. This includes setting up a system containing audit standards, foster grants planning, education and counseling systems, and regular follow-up assessment of performance as a matter of urgency for a stable social policy.

    As an exploratory study, this study hopes to provide suggestions about structuring kinship foster care system by means of compiling social workers’ practical experiences and points of view. However, since the implementation of kinship foster care may face some unintended effects, government agencies should consider and prepare in advance to construct the more appropriate kinship foster care service model in Taiwan.
    Reference: 一、英文文獻:
    Altshuler, S. J. G., James P. (1999). "Completing the evaluation trangle for the next century: Measuring child 'well-being' in family foster care." Child Welfare 78(1): 125-141.
    Boisen, S. B. (1999). "Child welfare professionals' attitudes toward kinship foster care." Child Welfare 78(3): 315-337.
    Berrick, J. D. (1997). "Assessing quality of care in kinship and foster family care." Families Relations 46(3): 273-280.
    Geen, R. (2005). "The Evolution of Kinship Care Policy and Practice." Children, Families, and Foster Care 14(1): 131-144.
    Geen, R.(2000). "In the interest of children- rethinking federal and state policies affecting kinship care." Policy and Practice of Public Human Services 58(1): 19-27.
    Geen, R. & Boots, W. S.(1999). "Family Care or Foster Care? How State Policies Affect Kinship Caregivers." The Urban Institute(A-34): 1-6.
    Jantz, A., R. Geen, R. Bess, C. Andrews, & V. Russel(2002). The Continuing Evolution of State Kinship Care Policies. Washington, D.C, The Urban Institute.
    Naomikarp (1996). "Legal problems of grandparents and other kinship caregivers." Generations (San Francisco, Calif.) 20: 57-60.
    Pierce, L. (1999). "Kinship Foster Care(「Kinship Foster Care: Policy, Practice, and Research」Book Review)." Families in Society 80(4): 423-425.
    Russell, V. Andrews, C. Bess, R. Geen, R.& Jantz, A.(2002). Assessing the New Federalism:The Continuing Evolution of State Kinship Care Policies. Urban Institute.
    Robert Chipman, Susan J. Wells, & Michelle A. Hohmson(2002). "The Meaning of Quality in Kinship Foster Care- Caregiver, Child, and Worker Perspectives." Families in Society 83(5/6): 508-520.

    二、中文文獻:
    余漢儀(2002)。親屬寄養之迷思。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
    吳自甦(1981)。文化與家庭。臺北:大林。
    郭靜晃(2004)。兒童少年福利與服務。台北:揚智文化。
    陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。臺北:五南。
    彭淑華主編(2008)。兒童福利-理論與實務。臺北:華都。
    潘淑滿(2003)。質性理論與應用。臺北:心理。
    簡春安、鄒平宜(1998)。社會工作研究法。臺北:巨流。
    田美惠(2001)。影響寄養家庭流失因素之探討。花蓮:私立慈濟大學社會工作研究所碩士論文。
    吳淑惠(2002)。原住民寄養兒童生活適應之研究。嘉義:國立嘉義大學/家庭教育研究所碩士論文。
    周珮綺(2006)。台灣與日本家庭寄養制度之比較分析。台北:私立中國文化大學青少年兒童福利研究所碩士論文。
    內政部(2004)。兒童生活狀況調查。臺北:內政部統計處。
    內政部(2003)。少年身心調查報告。臺北:內政部統計處。
    美國兒童福利聯盟網站 "Executive Summary."(2008)
    美國兒童福利聯盟網站 "Introduction of Book:CWLA's Standards of Excellence for Kinship Care Service." (2008)
    美國兒童福利聯盟網站 "Financial Resources." (2008)
    美國兒童福利聯盟網站 "Introduction of Book:CWLA's Standards of Excellence for Kinship Care Service." (2008)
    全國法規資料庫。兒童及少年福利法(2004)。http://law.moj.gov.tw/。
    全國法規資料庫。兒童及少年福利法施行細則(2004)。http://law.moj.gov.tw/。
    全國法規資料庫。民法(2008)。網址:http://law.moj.gov.tw/。
    臺北市政府社會局網站。兒童與少年福利(2011)。http://www.bosa.taipei.gov.tw/
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    社會學研究所
    94254016
    98
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0094254016
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[社會學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    401601.pdf186KbAdobe PDF1080View/Open
    401602.pdf796KbAdobe PDF2177View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback