● 中文摘要：

　　我國家庭暴力防治法於2007年03月修法，正式讓家庭暴力事件服務處的設置納入法律規範當中。雖然家庭暴力事件服務處的設置具有法源依據，但對其在家庭暴力防治網絡中的角色定位、組織編制並未有所規範，使得家庭暴力事件服務處在防治網絡中的位階不清，導致各地方法院家庭暴力事件服務處與網絡成員間合作模式亦有所差異，使得各縣市之家庭暴力事件服務處的服務品質與內容不一致。

　　本研究針對家庭暴力事件服務處社工員、司法人員、警政人員、社政人員等研究參與者進行深度訪談，藉由探討家庭暴力事件服務處及網絡成員的合作經驗，從中釐清家庭暴力事件服務處於家庭暴力防治網絡中的運作狀況，瞭解他們在網絡合作上的限制，並歸納出建立正向合作關係之因素。期望能從研究結果中找尋強化網絡成員間合作關係，以提供家庭暴力防治網絡間未來合作時的參考依據。本研究發現如下：

一、家庭暴力事件服務處與網絡成員的合作，可分為正式與非正式合作關係兩類，溝通聯繫方式包括定期或不定期的網絡會議、書面報告、電話聯繫、婦幼系統通報、私下聚會當面溝通…等方式。

二、在合作限制的部分，在正式合作關係中主要的合作限制，包括「權責劃分」與「專業評估」兩部份。在非正式合作關係中主要的合作限制，則包括「服務處社工的自我設限」與「專業角色差異」兩部份。

三、家庭暴力事件服務處與網絡成員建立長期合作關係的要素，在自然人方面，包括(一)網絡成員的肯定與支持；(二)良好的溝通與協調；(三)網絡成員的積極主動；(四)建立良好的非正式互動關係。在法人方面，包括(一)相互支援與資源共享；(二)角色功能的相互瞭解；(三)面對問題時良好的因應方式。

　　根據上述研究發現，本研究者提出以下幾點建議：一、對於內政部家庭暴力防治委員會建議，(一)將司法網絡成員納入家庭暴力事件服務處招標之評選委員；(二)將家庭暴力事件服務處之組織定位法制化。二、對於方案委託單位建議，(一)建立與承接單位溝通之管道；(二)有效協助宣導服務處相關資訊。三、對於方案承接單位建議多與網絡單位進行互動。四、對於家庭暴力事件服務處社工員建議，(一)建立網絡成員之間的非正式互動關係；(二)減少自我設限，適時進行司法倡導。五、對於社政網絡成員建議對於服務處之專業角色能夠互為理解。六、對於警政網絡成員建議加強與家庭暴力事件服務處之互動與聯繫。七、對於司法網絡成員建議主動與服務處社工進行溝通與聯繫，瞭解服務處之功能與相關資源。

● English Abstract:

     This study is about experience of network cooperation, when their cooperative mechanism face to cooperating with the network, summarized the factors, it is established in good cooperative relations. This study have interviewed some professional network members, include judicial officers, police officers, domestic violence social workers and social workers of the Domestic Violence Service Centers. The findings of this study are as follows:

1. The cooperative mechanism can be divided into formal and informal cooperative relations. Their communicated channel can be divided into co-operation conference, written report, by telephone, by national domestic violence protection information system and informal communication.

2. The difficulty they faced include “division of responsibilities”,” professional assessed”, “social workers of centers limited himself” and “ difference of professional role”.

3. The factors in establishing the good cooperative relations include “network members' recognition and support”, “good communication and coordination”, “members of the network is positive and active”, “building good informal interaction”, “mutual support and sharing of resources”, “the mutual understanding of the role and function”, “to face the problem when good ways of coping”.

     Based on the above findings, the researcher suggests the following recommendations: (1) For Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Prevention Committee:(A)The judicial members of the network should be contained into the accreditation committee.(B)To clearly define the domestic violence services Center becomes a formalize organization in the legal system.(2)For the program commissioned unit:(A)To establish and implemented unit of communication pipeline.(B)To effective propaganda center service.(3)For the implemented unit: To increase interaction with the network units. (4)For the social worker of the Domestic Violence Service Center:(A)To establish members of the network in informal interaction.(B) To reduce self-handicapping, timely judicial advocacy.(5)For domestic violence social worker: To make understand the professional roles of Domestic Violence Service Centers of the service.(6)For police officer: To strengthen the interaction and contact with the Domestic Violence Service Center.(7)For judicial officer: To initiative communication and contact with the Domestic Violence Service Center ,and to understand the functions and resources of the center actively.

● 文章連結：

https://hdl.handle.net/11296/kff6g3

● 資料來源：

臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統