:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:顏面燒傷者自我認同的轉變歷程
作者:張麗珍
作者(外文):LI-Chen Chang
校院名稱:東海大學
系所名稱:社會工作學系
指導教授:王國羽
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2010
主題關鍵詞:身心障礙研究顏面燒傷障礙認同健常能力主義污名化disability studiesfacial burnsdisability identificationableismstigmatization
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(1) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:66
論文中文提要
顏面燒傷者的損傷是身體部位能見度最高和難以遮掩的臉部。特殊的容貌特徵,在所謂的健常人標準下,社會一般大眾對他們的外表定位為醜陋的容貌損傷者,和其他障礙類別相較更容易經歷污名經驗。顏面燒傷者障礙屬性和終身障礙者不同,他們曾經經驗過被社會接納且順從屬於非身心障礙的社會認同,而今必須被迫放棄一種非身心障礙認同,且接受「他者」的認同。顏面燒傷者因致殘時間和損傷部位的特殊性,形塑他們障礙化經驗與歷程也是相當獨特的。
本研究對象是顏面燒傷者,從顏面燒傷者個人主觀經驗出發,探討顏面燒傷後形塑新的自我認同轉變歷程之內涵和損傷生活的社會互動經驗。本研究採用質性訪談,對十二位顏面燒傷者進行資料收集,運用Goffman的社會烙印概念,分析顏面損傷者他們受傷後在社會互動過程所經歷的負面經驗。
研究主要發現,大多數受訪者都會遭遇身體被社會污名的經驗,以及直接受到社會審美價值觀的審視,對受訪者個人其他特質和能力作出錯誤的解釋和評價;受訪者為處理因為外表容貌損傷,而必須做些遮掩、化妝、護膚美白保養或整形重建手術。研究結果發現修補自己外表的期望,是跨越性別的經驗,無論男女在遭遇自己容貌改變後,都會發展出處理與調整的機制,這樣的機制是沒有性別的差異的。污名化經驗和社會偏見態度交互作用,影響受訪者受傷後新的自我認同發展。
受訪者重塑具有障礙成份之新的自我認同時,內心轉折發展歷程如下(一)面對自我形象損毀的衝擊;(二)為受傷事件尋求合理化的解釋;(三)獲得重塑自我認同改變動力。從受訪者調適經驗,歸納他們從健常能力者跨越到身心障礙者的自我認同,可分為消極的認同與接納自己就是障礙者兩種種主要類型。
受訪者對自己障礙身分的看法是「功能損傷的正常人」,受訪者從健常能力者成為身心障礙者的歷程,是由具有損傷成分的生活經驗,跨越社會所謂「障礙世界」和「正常人世界」之間的交流經驗。受訪者一致認為,現在和受傷前最大的差異是臉部特徵的改變,而且這個差異特徵不必然造成其他身心理功能不正常的結果;正常和不正常應是心態問題,而不是功能的問題。
根據研究結論,本研究分別對顏面燒傷者、社會工作研究與教育、社會工作實務和社會福利政策等方面提出反省與初步建議。
Abstract
Facial burns refer to the facial injuries which have the highest visibility on the human body and, technically, are characterized by difficulties in hiding the appearance. People with facial burns have unique facial features, and, under the judgment of the healthy, the general public believe they are ugly for their facial damage. They are, therefore, easier to experience the stigmatization than people with disabilities of other categories in social life. People with facial burns are different from those who suffer the life-long disability in the fact that the former are forced to give up their social identity and normal life they used to have right after the injury. The particularity derived from the occasion for people to get their facial burns and the injured spots shapes their experiences in being disabled, and the process is quite unique.
The subject of this study is people with facial burns, and it starts from their subjective personal experience with a focus on how they shape their new self-identity and their social interaction after the injuries. The research applies qualitative interviews, twelve of which with people with facial burns are included for data collection. The text uses the concept of social stigma of Goffman to analyze the negative interaction experience that people with facial burns encounter in the process of social interaction.
The major findings of the research are that most respondents suffer the social stigma attached to the body and that they are under direct judgment from the aesthetic values of society. The respondents have to do something to cover up the injuries, to make themselves up, to whiten the facial skin, or to undergo surgery for reconstruction in order to deal with abnormalities caused by facial injuries. The result of the study finds that the expectation of fix appearance goes beyond the gender experience. The appearance change in the face, regardless of gender, develops a mechanism for processing and adjustment, and such a mechanism has no gender difference. The interaction of the experience of stigmatization and the social bias impact the respondents’ development of a new self-identity after they were injured.
The respondents reshape a new self-identity with features of disability, and their inner transition course features as follows: (1) to accept the negative impact of self-image damage, (2) to seek rationalization for facial injuries, (3) to get the strength to reshape self-identification. From the self-adjustment experiences of the respondents, we can summarize that their self-identification from a person with normal ability to a person with physical and mental disabilities involves two major types: negative identity and positive identity which enables them to accept themselves as individuals with disability.
The respondents identify themselves as “normal people with physical function injuries.” The process of respondents’ self-identification from a person with normal ability to one with disability is a transaction between “disability world” and “normal world” with injury components of life experience. The respondents agree that the biggest difference between now and then is the change appearing in the facial feature; however, such a difference is not bound to create another physical and mental function disorder. The normality and the abnormality are decided by psychological conditions rather than functional problems.
The conclusion of this study offers some reflections and preliminary recommendations for people with facial burns and social workers, and also for the benefits of social work research and education, social work practice, and social welfare policies.
參考書目

一、中文部份

毛家舲(1989)。急性期燒傷成人的壓力感受與影響因素。護理雜誌, 36(1),71-83。new window
孔有芸 (1993)。燒傷病患之出院計劃。榮總護理,10(1),32-38。new window
王德威(譯)(1993)。知識的考掘(M. Foucault原著,The Archaeology of Knowledge)。台北:麥田。
王淑燕、陳光達、俞智敏(譯)(1998)。文化(C. Jenks原著,Culture)。台北:巨流。
王紹穎(2007)。自我感、復原力與創傷後症狀之關聯性研究:以燒傷病人為例。 台北:台灣大學心理學研究所碩士論文。
朱儀羚、康脆婷、柯禧慧、蔡欣志、吳芝儀譯(2004)。敘事心理與研究:自我、創傷與意義建構(M. L. Crossley原著,Introducing Narrative Psychology: Self, Traum and the Construction of Meaning)。嘉義:濤石。
吳嘉苓(2002)。受污名的性別、性別化污名﹕從台灣「不孕」男女處境分析污名的性別政治。台灣社會學刊,29,127-179。new window
吳家輔(2003)。諾弗洒欣(Norfloacin)複合物之製備及燒傷療效評估。台北:國防醫學院藥學研究所碩士論文。
吳芝儀(2005)。敘事研究的方法論探討。齊力、林本炫編,值性研究方法與資料分析 (pp. 145-188)。嘉義:南華大學社教所。
吳秀照(2007)。臺中縣身心障礙者就業需求:排除社會障礙的就業政策探討。社會政策與社會工作學刊,2(11),149-198。new window
何昭中(1994)。燒傷病人急性期身體心像改變及其相關因素之探討。台北:國防醫學院護理研究所碩士論文。
余國華(1986)。顏面傷殘青少年心理特質之分析研究。台北﹕國立台灣教育學院特殊教育研究所碩士論文。new window
邱小華 (1993)。燒燙傷病患之社會工作。榮總護理,10(1),30-31。new window

林淑英(1992)。顏面傷殘者自我概念與社會適應之研究。台北﹕國立台灣大學社會學研究所碩士論文。
林素娥(1993)。嚴重燒傷病患之護理。榮總護理,10(1),10-16。new window
林珍妃(1995)。顏面傷殘者的社會心理問題。長庚護理,6(1),51-53。new window
林耀盛、吳英璋(2001)。慢性病患者的意義建構及其行動策略:以糖尿病為例。中華心理衛生學刊,14(4),31-58。new window
林文源(2001)。「醫療化」再思考。臺大社會學刊,29,213-250。new window
林文琪(譯)(2006)。認同與差異(K. Woodward原著,Identity and Difference)。台北:韋伯。
林金梅(2004)。中途顏面燒傷患者之生命轉化歷程─三位傷友的故事。嘉義:南華大學生死學研究所碩士論文。
林幸台(2004)。高職特教班教師參與轉銜服務工作及其對專業合作態度之研究。特殊教育研究學刊,26,1-17。new window
林耀盛、吳英璋(2001)。慢性病患者的意義建構及其行動策略:以糖尿病為例。中華心理衛生學刊,14(4),31-58。new window
林耀盛、李弘毅、余德慧(2007)。生病作為一種倫理事件:洗腎者病程經驗的現象詮釋。本土心理學,28,79-137。new window
周翠蘭(1996)。出院後成人燒傷患者社會支持、因應行為與心理社會適應相關之探討。台北:國防醫學院護理研究所碩士論文。
胡慧林(1995)。嚴重燒傷社會心理問題及處理。榮總護理,12(1),28-32。new window
胡幼慧、姚美華(1996)。一些質性方法上的思考:信度與效度?如何抽樣?如何收集資料?登錄與分析?。胡幼慧(主編),質性研究----理論、方法及本土女性研究實例 (pp. 141-158)。台北:巨流。
胡紹嘉(2008)。敘事、自我與認同﹕從文本考察到課程探究。台北﹕秀威資訊科技。
孫治本(2004)。個人化與生活風格社群。台北:唐山。new window
袁繼銓(2002)。以類神經網路預測燒傷病患住院日之研究。高雄:國立中山大學資訊管理學系研究所碩士論文。


高淑清、連雅慧、林月琴(譯)(2004)。探究生活經驗﹕建立敏思行動教育學的人文科學(M. V. Manen原著,Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy)。嘉義﹕濤石。
許夢芸(譯)(2006)。文化研究智典(C. Barker 原著,The Sage Dictionary Cultural of Studies)。台北:韋伯。
張君玫(譯)(1997)。重塑女體:美容手術的兩難(K. Davis原著,Reshaping the Female Body: The Dilemma of Cosmetic Surgery)。台北:巨流。
張慈惠(1997)。燒傷病患生活品質及其相關因素之探討。台北:國立台灣大學護理學研究所碩士論文。
張紀萍(2000)。燒傷病人情緒困擾及其相關因素之探討。花蓮:慈濟醫學院護理學研究所。
張雪吟(2003)。團體調適技能訓練對燒傷患者身體心像、情緒和生活品質之成效探討。台北:國立台北護理學院護理研究所碩士論文。
陳豐偉、張家銘(譯)(2009)。你的感覺,我懂!:同理心的力量,創造自我了解與親密關係(A. Ciaramicoli原著,The Power of Empathy:A Practical Guide to Creating Intimacy, Self-Understanding and Lasting Love)。台北﹕麥田。
張恆豪、蘇峰山(2009)。戰後台灣國小教科書中的障礙者意象分析。臺灣社會學刊,42,143-188。new window
康 珮(2008)。從傅柯的微觀權力探討《忠義水滸全書》中水滸身體與權力的關係。興大人文學報,41,91-116。
陳惠絹(1987)。住院燒傷病人疼痛感受程度相關因素之探討。台北:國防醫學院護理學研究所碩士論文。
陳昱瑞(1987)。腫瘤病變知多少?陽光文教雜誌合訂本,35-39。
陳理維(1998)。燒傷與腸道黏膜屏障功能失常之研究。高雄﹕高雄醫學院醫學研究所博士論文。
陳 燁(2001)。半臉女兒。台北﹕平安。
陳惠萍(2003)。常體之外 --「殘障」的身體社會學思考。台中:東海大學社會學研究所碩士論文。
陳碧霜(2006)。一位嚴重燒傷身體心像紊亂患者之護理經驗。嘉基護理,6(1),26-34。
陳素秋(譯)(2006)。文化社會學的實踐(E. L. Desfor & A. Scott原著,Sociological Theory in the Classical Era: Text and Readings)。台北:韋伯。
陳進茂(2007)。穩定就業之重度燒傷患者的工作調適歷程與相關因素之研究。高雄:高雄師範大學復健諮商研究所碩士論文。
陳秋山、王玉馨、郭慧琳(譯)(2008)。社工質性研究(I. Shaw & N. Gould原著,Qualitative Research in Social Work)。台北:華杏。
陳惠雅(譯)(2009)。贏得有趣‧活得堅強(Rainer Schmidt 原著,Spielend das Leben gewinnen – Was Menschen stark macht)。台北﹕南與北文化。
黃金麟(2001)。歷史、身體、國家:近代中國的身體形成1895-1937。台北:聯經。
黃小芬(2006)。成年燒燙傷患者之家庭復原歷程研究。國立花蓮教育大學諮商與輔導研究所碩士論文。
詹淑雅、王琪珍、張嘉蘋、阮純茵(2000)。 一位顏面燒傷婦女住院期間之身體心像改變及因應行為。護理雜誌,47(4),31-39。new window
趙碧華、朱美珍(編譯)(2000)。研究方法:社會工作暨人文科學領域的運用(A. Rubin & E. Babbie 原著,Reasarch Methods for Social Work)。台北:學富。
楊大春(1995)。傅柯。台北:生智。
黎士銘(譯)(2001)。身體意象(Sarah Grogan 原著,Body Image: Understanding Body Cissatisfaction inMmen、Women and Children)。台北﹕弘智。
劉孔群(2004)。燒傷病患急性期睡眠品質與其相關因素之探討。台北:台北醫學大學護理學研究所碩士論文。
歐陽秀芳(1999)。出院燒傷病患健康信念、社會支持與自我照顧相關之探討。台北:國防醫學院護理研究所碩士論文。
潘淑滿(2003)。質性研究﹕理論與運用。台北﹕心理。
蔡采秀(譯)(1998)。傅柯(B. Smart 原著,Foucault, Michel)。台北:巨流。
魏季李 (1995)。嚴重燒燙傷成人復健參與及社會復健之研究。台中:東海大學社會工作研究所碩士論文。
簡戊鑑(2004)。台灣地區燒燙傷流行病學特性及醫療照護服務分析。台北:國防醫學院生命科學研究所博士論文。
羅淑芬、黃秀梨、姚開屏、劉雪娥(2001)。復健期燒傷病患照顧者壓力感受、社會支援及其相關因素。臺灣醫學,5(2),28-37。


二、西文部份

Borse, C.(2004). On the distinction between disease and illness. In A. L. Caplan, J. J. McCartney, D. A. Sisti (Eds.), Health, disease, and illness:: Concepts in medicine(pp. 77-89). Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Barnes, C. (1992). Disabling imagery and the media: An Exploration of the Principles
for Media Represenations of Disabled People. Halifax: Ryburn.
Barnes, C., & Mercer, G. (2003). Disability. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bury, M. B. (1996). Defining and researching disability: challenges and responses. In C. Barnes & G. Mercer (Eds.), Exploring the divide: Illness and disability(pp. 18-38). Leeds: The Disability press.
Brisenden, S. (1998). Independent living and the medical model of disability. In T. Shakespeare(Ed.), The Disability Reader: Social Science Perspectives, 21-27. London: Cassell.
Bickenbach, J.E., Chatterji, S., Badley, E.M., & Ustun, T.B. (1999). Models of disablement, universalism and the international classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Social Science & Medicine, 48, 1173-1187.
Devlieger, P. J. (1999). From handicap to disability: Language use and cultural meaning in the United States. Disability and Rehabilation, 21(7 ), 346-354.
Darling, R. B. (2003). Towards model of changing disability identities: A proposed typology and research agenda. Disability & Society, 18(7), 881-895.
Elks, M. A. (1990). Another look at facial disfigurement. Journal of Rehabilitation, 56(1), 36-40.
Finkelstein, V. (1998). Emancipating disability studies. In T. Shakespeare(Ed.), The Disability Reader: Social Science Perspectives(pp. 29-49). London: Cassell.
French, R. (1994). “In whose service? A review of the development of services for disabled people in Great Britian. Phsyiotherapy, 80(4), 200-204.
Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled body. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. London: Polity Press.
Hahn, H (1988). Can disability be beautiful? Social Policy, Winter, 26-32.
Harrison, T. C., & Kahn, D. L. (2004). Disability rites: The cultural shift following impairment. Family & Community Health, 27(1), 86-93.
Hughes, B. (1999). The constitution of impairment: Modernity and the aesthetic of oppression. Disability & Society, 14(2), 155-172.
Hahn, H. D., Belt, T. L. (2004). Disability identity and attitudes toward cure in a sample of disabled activist. Journal of Health and Behavior, 45(December), 453-464.
Lawrence, B. (1991). Self-concept formation and physical handicap: Some educational implication for integration. Disability, Handicap and Society, 6(2), 139-146.
Livenh, H., & Antonak, R.E. (1997). Psychological adaptation to chronic illness and disability. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
Llewellyn, A., & Chung, M. C. (1997). The self-esteem of children with physical disability—problem and dilemma’s of research. Journal of developmental and physical disability, 9(3), 265-275.
Llewellyn, A., & Hogan, K. (2000). The Use and Abuse of Models of Disability. Disability & Society, 15(1), 157-165.
Macgregor, F. C. (1990). Facial disfigurement: Problem and management of social interaction implication for mental health. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 14, 249-257.
Morris, J.(Ed.). (1996). Encounters with strangers: Feminism and disability. London: Women’s Press.
Marks, D. (1997). Models of disability. Disability and Rehabilitation, 19(3), 85-91.
Murphy, R. E. (1987). The body silent. New York: Henry Holt.
Murphy, R. E., Schcer, J., Murphy, Y., & Mack, R. (1988). Physical disability and social liminality: A study in the rituals of adversity. Social Science and Medicine, 26, 235-242.
Murphy, J.W. (2005). Social norms and their implications for disability. Journal of Social Work in Disability & Rehabilitation, 4(1/2), 153-163.
McGrouther, D. A. (1997). Facial disfigurement. British Medical Journal ,314, 991.
Michailkis, D. (2003). The systems theory concept of disability: One is not born a disabled person, one is observed to be one. Disability & Society, 18(2), 209-229.
Oliver, M. (1986). Social policy and disability: Some theoretical issues. Disability, Handicap and Society, 1(1), 5-17.
Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding disability: From theory to practice. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Priestley, M. (1998). Constructions and creations: Idealism, materialism and disability theory. Disability & Society, 13(1), 75-94.
Peters, S. (2000) Is there a disability culture? A syncretisation of three possible world views. Disability & Society, 15(4), 583-601.
Rao, S. (2006). Parameters of normality and culture constructions of ‘mental retardation’: Perspective of Bengali families. Disability & Society, 21(2), 159-178.
Schilder, P.(1970). The image and appearance of the human body. New York: International Universtities Press.
Scheer, J., & Groce, N. (1988). Impairment as a human constant: Cross culture and historical perspectives on variation. Journal of Social Issues, 44(1), 22-37.
Shakespeare, T. (1994). Cultural representation of disabled people: Dustbin for disavowal?Disability & Society, 9(3), 283-298.
Shakespeare, T. (1996). Disability, identity and difference. In C. Barnes & G. Mercer (Eds.), Exploring the divide: Illness and disability(pp. 94-113). Leeds: The Disability press.
Stone, S.D. (1995). The myth of bodily perfection. Disability & Society, 10(4), 413-424.
Swain, J. & French, S. (2000). Toward an affirmation model of disability . Disability & Society, 15(4), 569-582.
Sherry, M. (2007). (Post)colonising Disability. Intersecting Gender and Disability Perspectives in Rethinking Postcolonial Identities, 4,10-22.
Taleporos, G.., & McCabe, M.P. (2002). Body image and physical disability ----personal perspectives. Social Science & Medicine, 54, 971-980.
Turner, V. (1995). The ritual process : Structure and anti-structure. New York :Aldine de Gruyter.
Verbrugge, L. M., & Jette, A. M (1994). The disablement process. Social Science & Medicine, 38(1), 1-14.
Wendell, S. (1996). The rejected body: feminist philosophical reflections on disability. New York: Routledge.
Waston, N. (1998). Enabling identity: Disability, self and citizenship. In T. Shakespeare(Ed.), The Disability Reader: Social Science Perspectives (pp.148-162). London: Cassell.
Zola, I.K. (1985). Depictions of disability----Metaphor, message and medium in media: A research and political agenda. Social Science Journal, 22(4), 5-17.
Zola, I.K. (1993). Self identity and the naming question: Reflections on the language of disability. Social Science of Medicine, 36(2), 167-173.














 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE