臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：少年轉介輔導過程及其效果研究
作者：徐錦鋒 引用關係
作者(外文)：Jiin-Feng Hsu
校院名稱：中央警察大學
系所名稱：犯罪防治研究所
指導教授：謝文彥、鄧煌發
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2015
主題關鍵詞：少年；轉介輔導；輔導過程；輔導效果；diversion；juvenile；diversion process；diversion effects
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(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:7
摘要
本論文除試圖想要理解國內外轉介輔導的輔導目標、制度梗概以及目前的實施輔導過程之外，使用深入訪談法訪談曾接受轉介輔導完畢一年以上的少年計7人及實際參與轉介輔導實務工作人員計13人，以探討轉介輔導的實施過程及其效果。
本論文主要研究結果，計有下列數項：
1.轉介輔導之實施過程方面：此階段可分為調查與交付階段以及實施輔導階段兩個小項目，進行評估。其中 ，在調查與交付階段，法官會在調查之日前，先命少年調查官進行審前調查；少年調查官可以在其所提具的審前調查報告中，建議法官裁定轉介輔導。最後，法官也會在協商式審理中，決定是否轉介輔導。俟轉介輔導裁定確定後，法院才正式交付機構輔導。在實施輔導階段，實施輔導是從社工人員與少年進行訂約開始，接著針對少年的需求與問題進行預估，再接著是介入輔導的。目前轉介輔導執行方式係以個案工作為主，團體工作為輔。其中個案工作較常運用會談、家訪、電訪，及校訪來進行。而社工人員較少使用團體工作的方式。依法律規定，轉介輔導執行一年後即可結案，包括少年已獲改善的積極結案，及少年遷移他縣市的消極結案。
2.轉介輔導之輔導效果方面：轉介輔導之輔導效果的評估，可分為輔導過程的評估以及輔導效果的評估兩個小項目，進行評估。在輔導過程的評估方面，本論文研究結果發現，轉介輔導之實施過程中，對轉介輔導制度持肯定的評價、能夠達到原先預期的輔導目標、尚能保障少年的權益、能有效地被運作。在輔導效果的評估方面，本論文研究結果發現，轉介輔導確實能發揮輔導功能、有再犯預防效果、對生活有正向的改變、與家人關係有正向的改變、認知與行為有正向改變，而且值得繼續推展。
最後，本論文依據上述研究結果，針對立法、司法，以及主管機關，提出建議，包括：1.增修法條內容；2.加強職前與在職訓練；3.司法院不能漠視轉介輔導案件過少的問題；4.主管機關應該對司法社會工作有更多的接觸與瞭解；5. 法院與機構、社會局之間的夥伴關係要加強；6.整個輔導過程的評估機制要優先建立；8.宜編訂執行手冊等建議。
關鍵字：少年、轉介輔導、輔導過程、輔導效果
Abstract
The author of this thesis tries to understand the diversion goals, system, and diversion process both domestically and internationally. To grasp the idea of diversion process and its effects, the author interviewed seven juveniles who had completed their diversion process for over a year as well as thirteen diversion practitioners.
The main findings of this thesis are listed as below:
1. The process of diversion
The diversion process could be divided in to the investigation and hand over phase. During the investigation and hand over phase, the judge would ask the probation officers to investigate the juvenile before the actual date of investigation held by the court. The probation officers could suggest the judge to rule diversion in their pre-trial investigation report. Finally, the judge would determine during the conferencing trial process whether to rule diversion. After the diversion decision was made, the court will then had over the juvenile to other institutes. The actual diversion phase starts when social workers engage with juveniles. They would then estimate the juvenile's needs and problems. Later, the social workers would start to intervene. Presently, diversions are processed mainly as case works, with a smaller portion processed as group works. In case works, social workers would utilize skills including interviewing, paying the family visits, phone calls, and visiting the schools. Social workers do not usually utilize group work skills. According to the law, diversion cases could be closed after being carried out for a year, they could either end in a positive way while the juvenile had improved, or end in a passive way when the juvenile moved to another jurisdiction.
2. The effect of diversion
The assessment of diversion effect could be divided into the assessment of the diversion process and its effect. The researcher found that, during the diversion process, most people give it positive evaluation, as it could achieve the diversion goal and protect juvenile’s welfare, at the same time operates effectively. As the research results showed on the effects of diversion, diversion could bring its effect into full play, prevent re-offending, make positive life changes for both juveniles, their families, as well as cognitive and behaviors.
In conclusion, based on research results, the researcher had come to a few suggestions for legislation and judicial institutes, as well as authorities. Including (1) amend the law, (2) increase vestibule training and on-the-job training, (3) Judicial Yuan cannot ignore issues with lessened diversion cases, (4) authorities should reach out more and know more about judicial social work, (5) strengthen the companion relationship between the court, institutions, and Social Welfare Bureau, (6) prioritize the set-up of assessment mechanism during the diversion process, and (7) create manual for executers. To enhance current diversion process, it is important to consider the above suggestions.
Key words：juvenile、diversion, diversion process, diversion effects
參考文獻
一、中文部分
http://www.judicil.gov.tw/juds/index1.htm
中正大學教育學研究所（主編）（2003）。質的研究方法。高雄市：麗文文化。
中華社會福利聯合勸募協會、鄭怡世（2010）。成效導向的方案規劃與評估。臺北市：巨流。
王佳煌、潘中道（譯）（2002），Neuman, W. Lawrence 著。當代社會研究（初版6刷）。臺北市：學富文化。（原著第4版出版於2000年）
司法院（2014）。司法統計。2014年3月30日，檢索自http://www.judicial.gov.tw/juds/index1.htm
司法院（2015）。司法統計年報，2015年4月7日檢索自
司法院，2007，《審前調查手冊》。臺北：司法院。
白倩如、李仰慈、曾華源（2014）。復原力任務中心社會工作──理論與技術。臺北市：洪葉文化。new window
石志偉等（譯）（2001），Christine Marlow著。社會工作研究方法（版刷）。臺北市：洪葉文化。
危芷芬審閱(2010)。心理學導論。台北市；雙頁書廊。
朱惠英，郭凡琦（2013）。如何與非自願個案工作（2版6刷）。臺北市：張老師文化。
宋麗玉、曾華源、施教裕、鄭麗珍 （2010）。社會工作理論──處遇模式與案例分析（第3版）。臺北市：洪葉文化。
李自強（2001）。觸法少年安置輔導執行現況及其影響因素（未出版碩士論文）。國立暨南國際大學社會政策與社會工作學系，南投市。
李自強、曾華源（2010）。社會工作之直接服務。臺北市：洪葉文化。
汪智艷等譯(2004)。成長中的家庭—家庭治療師眼中的個人、家庭與社會。北京：世界圖書。
周愫嫻、曹立群（2007）。犯罪學理論及其實證。臺北市：五南。
周震歐（1969）。少年犯罪與觀護制度。臺北市：臺灣商務印書館。
周震歐（1982）。邁向已開發國家的犯罪問題。臺北市：幼獅。
周震歐主編（2007）。兒童福利。臺北市：巨流。
林秀雲（譯）（2013），Earl Babbie著。社會科學研究方法（2版1刷）。臺北市：雙葉書廊。（原著第13版出版於2013年）
林尚蔚（2008）。司法少年轉介輔導之探討（未出版碩士論文）。國立台北大學犯罪學研究所，臺北市。
林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花（2005）。質性研究訪談模式與實施。身心障礙研究， 3（2），122-136。
法務部（2015）。102年少年兒童犯罪概況及其分析（表3-3-1）。2015年4月7日法務部網站檢索自 http://www.moj.gov.tw/public/Attachment/412221605864.pdf
法務部（2015）。84-102年各年度少年兒童犯罪概況及其分析。2015年4 月7日法務部網站檢索自http://www.moj.gov.tw/lp.asp?CtNode=35595&;CtUnit=14021&;BaseDSD=7&;mp=302&;nowPage=2&;pagesize=15
施奕暉（2001）。我國少年事件處理法轉向制度的探討（未出版碩士論文）。國立中正大學犯罪防制研究所，嘉義縣。
胡中宜（2001年11月）。零合競爭V.S.合作夥伴：整合司法體系與少年福利體系因應轉向安置處分之策略研究。論文發表於中華民國觀護協會舉辦之｢司法保護轉向、機構安置輔導現況與展望｣實務研討會，臺北市。
胡中宜（2004年9月）。少年司法轉向計畫之國際比較與評析。論文發表於中華民國觀護協會舉辦之｢兒童及少年審前轉向與安置輔導｣實務研討會，臺北市。
胡中宜（2005）。少年犯罪轉向計畫之比較研究：以美、德、港、臺四地為例。犯罪與刑事司法研究，5，1-36。new window
胡中宜（2006）。「黑了，很難白回來」：美國、香港轉向計畫對我國警察處理少年微罪事件的省思。中央警察大學警學叢刊，36（5），169-184。new window
徐震、林萬億（1983）。當代社會工作。臺北市：五南。
徐錦鋒（1997a）。少年觀護制度。載於楊士隆、林健陽（主編），犯罪矯治-問題與對策，355-375頁。臺北市：五南。
徐錦鋒（2011年5月）。我國轉介輔導之服務輸送的檢討與展望。論文發表於中央警察大學犯罪防治研究所舉辦之｢2011年犯罪矯治與復歸｣犯罪防治學術研討會，桃園縣。
徐錦鋒、胡中宜（2009）。轉介輔導的接案與處遇流程研究。內政部兒童局補助之專題研究成果報告。臺北市：臺北市松陽社會福利事業基金會。
徐錦鋒主編（1997b）。少年觀護制度理論與實務。臺北市：洪葉。
高偉文（1997）。少年事件轉向處分之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學法律研究所，臺北市。
張迺良（1985）。少年法制之再檢討。「犯罪防制之整體策略」學術研討會論文輯。臺北市：中華民國觀護協會。
許春金、陳玉書（2003）。修復式正義（司法）實踐途徑的研究-提昇緩起訴與（鄉鎮市）刑案調解機能之實證研究Ⅰ。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（計畫編號：NSC93-2414-H-305-008）。
許澤天、薛智仁（譯）（2008），Kerner Hans-Jürgen著。德國刑事追訴與制裁。臺北市：元照。
郭靜晃（1996）。親職教育之趨勢-落實父母參與。空大學訊，249，45-52。
郭靜晃、曾華源（2000）。少年司法轉向制度之因應。臺北市：洪葉文化。
郭靜晃、黃志成（1998）。少年福利機構如何因應少年事件處理法轉向制度之研究。內政部兒童局委託之專題研究成果報告。
曾華源、胡中宜、陳玫伶、白倩如（2006）。法院裁定少年轉向安置機構輔導服務之研究。內政部兒童局委託之專題研究成果報告。
黃秉輝（2008）。如何配合社區處遇及社會資源。載於徐錦鋒（主編），少年觀護制度理論與實務，457-487頁。臺北市：洪葉文化。
黃蘭媖、許春金、黃翠紋（2011）。修復式正義理念運用於刑事司法制度之探討期末報告。法務部委託之專題研究成果報告。
楊士隆（2007）。刑事司法與犯罪學研究倫理。載於中華民國犯罪學學會（主編），刑事司法與犯罪學研究方法。嘉義縣：中華民國犯罪學學會。new window
萬育維（1984）。社區處遇在青少年犯罪防治體系運用之研究-以臺北市社福中心與少輔會為例。臺北市少年輔導委員會研究報告。
趙佳音、中華社會福利聯合勸募協會 （2010）。成效導向的方案規劃與評估。臺北市：巨流。
趙雍生（1997）。社會變遷下的少年偏差與犯罪。臺北市：桂冠。
蔡德輝（1984）。現代社會變遷中防治少年犯罪之新對策。臺北市：五南。new window
蔡德輝（1987）。犯罪學-犯罪學理論與犯罪防治。臺北市：偉成文化。new window
蔡德輝、楊士隆（1999）。社區處遇制度之可行性評估研究。法務部專題研究計畫成果報告。
蔡德輝、楊士隆（2012）。犯罪學。臺北市：五南圖書。new window
鄧煌發（2008）。二十一世紀刑事司法制度的新希望-論修復司法之內涵與困境。中央警察大學犯罪防治學報，13，117-142。new window
鄧煌發（2014）。動機與抑制間的拔河-毒品犯重複施用當下情境脈絡之實證研究。桃園縣：中華民國犯罪學學會。
薛惠玲（2004年9月）。臺北市少年輔導委員會在轉向制度的角色與未來展望。論文發表於中華民國觀護協會舉辦之｢兒童及少年審前轉向與安置輔導實務研討會｣，臺北市。
謝文彥（2006）。社區犯罪矯治研究。載於許春金等著，刑事司法體系組織與策略。臺北市：五南。new window
謝如媛（2007）。夢想或現實？由紐西蘭經驗看修復式司法之可能性—以法院轉介之修復式司法方案為中心。成大法學，14，121-166。new window
魏希聖、鄭怡世（譯）（2005）。方案評估原理與實務。臺北市：洪葉。
羅瑩雪（1996）。少年事件的轉向制度。論文發表於中華民國觀護協會舉辦之「少年事件處理法修訂之期盼座談會」，臺北市。

二、英文部分
ACT Government, Department of Disability, Housing and Community Services. (2011). Towards a diversionary framework for the act. Retrieved April 18th, 2011, from http://www.dhcs.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/188274/Towards_a_diversionary_framework_for_the_ACT_Discussion_Paper.pdf
Attorney-General’s Department, Canberra. (2002). The review of the Northern Territory Agreement –12 Months on from the commencement of the Agreement between the Commonwealth and Northern Territory Governments establishing the Juvenile pre-Court Diversion Program and Aboriginal Interpreter Service. Retrieved October 10th, 2011, from http://www.ag.gov.au/Documents/NT%20Report7feb%5B1%5D.pdf
Bernburg, J. G., &; Krohn, M. D. (2003). Labeling, life chances, and adult crime: the direct and indirect effects of official intervention in adolescence on crime in early adulthood. Criminology,41, 1288.
Blanco, M., Miller, D., &; Peck, G. (2007). How Effective Are Virginia’s Juvenile Diversion Programs? A quantitative and qualitative assessment for the Virginia State Crime Commission. Retrieved October 10th, 2011, from http://www.wm.edu/as/publicpolicy/documents/prs/crime.pdf.
Braithwaite, J. (2006). Crime, shame and reintegration. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, E. C., Graham, J. W., Hawkins, J. D., Arthur, M. W., Baldwin, M.,Oesterle, S., Briney, J. S., Catalano, R. F., &; Abbott, R. D. (2009) Designand analysis of the community youth development study: Longitudinal cohort sample. Evaluation Review, 33(4), 311-34.
Bryant, C. D. (Ed.). (2012). The handbook of deviant behavior. England : Routledge International Handbooks.
Carey, M. A. (1994). The group effect in focus group: Planning, implementing, and interpreting focus group research. In J. M. Morse (Ed.). Critical issues in qualitative research methods. London: Sage.
Challinger, D. (1985). Police action and the prevention of juvenile delinquency. In Borowski, A. &; Murray, J. M. (Eds), Juvenile Delinquency in Australia (pp. 290-302). North Ryde, NSW: Methuen Australia.
Citizens information board. (2010). Garda juvenile diversion programme [Web blog message]. Retrieved from http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/children_and_young_offenders/garda_juvenile_diversion_programme.html
Clough, A. R., Lee, K. K., &; Conigrave, K. M. (2008). Promising performance of a juvenile justice diversion programme in remote Aboriginal communities. Drug and Alcohol Review, 27, 433-438.
Crawford, A., &; Newburn, T. (2003). Youth offending and restorative justice: Implementing reform in youth justice. OR: Willan.
Cullen, F. T., &; Agnew, R. (2006). Criminological theory past to present (3rd Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Cumhlaba Development Services. (2007). Evaluation: KHULISA Make it Better (MIB) and Youth Diversion North West Evaluation Report. North West province , South Africa : Khulisa.
Daly, K., &; Hayes, H. (2001).Restorative justice and conferencing in Australia. Trends &; Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice,186,1-6.
Denious, J. (2011). Statewide evaluation of juvenile diversion programming. Retrieved 10th, April, 2012 from http://collaboration.omni.org/sites/dcjd/Community%20Library/Year%201%20Evaluation%20Reports/2010_Diversion_Literature%20Review_%20Jan%202011.pdf
Flynn, R. J. (2008). Community that care: A comprehensive system for youth prevention and promotion, and Canadian applications to date. IPC Review, 2,83-106.
Francis, C. D. (1990). Research Methods. Washington, DC: Brooks/Cole.
Gehm, J. (1998). Victim-offender mediation programs: An exploration of practice and theoretical frameworks. Western Criminology Review. Retrieved from http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v1n1/gehm.html
Gottesman, D., &; Schwarz, S. W. (2011). Juvenile justice in the U.S.: Facts for policy makers. Retrieved from http://www.nccp.org/publications/pdf/text_1038.pdf
Hagan, F. E.(2008). Introduction to criminology theories, methods, and criminal behavior (6th Ed.). USA: Sage.
Hawkins, J. D., &; Catalano, R. F. (2002). Investing in your community’s youth: An introduction to the communities that care system. MA: Channing Bete.
HG.org. (n.d.). Alternative Dispute Resolution - Guide to Alternative Dispute Resolution Law. Retrieved December, 2nd. 2010 from http://www.hg.org/adr.html
Hollis, F., &; Woods, M. (1981). Casework: A psychosocial therapy (3rd Ed.). New York: Radom House.
Hudson, B. (2002). Restorative justice and gendered violence: Diversion or effective justice? British Journal of Criminology, 42(3),616-634.
Janowitz, M. (1975). Sociological theory and social control. American Journal of Sociology, 81 (1), 82-108.
Jehle, J.-M. (2009). Criminal Justice in Germany:Facts and Figures(Fifth Edition). Retrieved December 8, 2010, from www.bmj.bund.de/media/archive/960.pdf
Joudo, J. (2008). Responding to substance abuse and offending in indigenous communities: Review of diversion programs. Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Junger-Tas, J, &; Dünkel, F. (Eds.). (2009). Diversion: A meaningful and successful alternative to punishment in European juvenile justice systems. Berlin, New York: Springer.
Kelly, E., &; Laio, M. N. (n.d.). Working with young people involved in the juvenile justice system. Youth Work Ireland- Galway [Web blog message]. Retrieved from http://www.youth.ie/sites/youth.ie/files/8%20-%20Working%20with%20Young%20People%20Involved%20in%20the%20Juvenile%20Justice%20System%20%28All%20Ireland%20version%29.pdf
Kettner, P. C., Moroney, R., &; Martin, L. L. (2008). Designing and managing programs: An effectiveness-based approach. London: Sage.
Klein, M.W. (1986). Labeling theory and delinquency policy: An experimental test. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 13(1), 47-79.new window
Law exploring: equal justice under law. (n.d.). Juvenile diversion program leader handbook: Based on a successful program in the Viking Council, Minneapolis, MN [Web blog message]. Retrieved January 26th, 2011, from www.learningforlife.org/exploring/lawandgovt/diversion.pdf
Lo, T. W., Maxwell, G. M., &; Wong, D. S. W. (2006). Diversion from youth courts in five Asia Pacific jurisdictions: Welfare or restorative solutions. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50(1), 5-20.
Mackesy-Buckley, &; Fergus, S. (2008). Taimi Tonu – Just in Time: an Evaluation of Tonga’s Restorative Youth Diversion Scheme (Unpublished master’s thesis). Wellington, New Zealand :Victoria University of Wellington.
Mankayi, A. (2007). Experiences of parents whose children have completed a diversion programme. Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master’s degree in Social Work (Social Development and Planning Programme) in the Faculty of Health Sciences at the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University. South African: the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
McAra, L., &; McVie, S. (2010). Youth crime and justice: Key messages from the Edinburgh study of youth transitions and crime. Criminology &; Criminal Justice, 10, (2), 179-209.
Melissa , B., Miller, D., &; Peck, G. (2007). How Effective Are Virginia’s Juvenile Diversion Programs? Retrieved October 31th, 2011, from http://www.wm.edu/as/publicpolicy/documents/prs/crime.pdf
Melossi, D., Giorgi, A. D., &; Massa, E. (2009). The “normality” of “second generations” in Italy and the importance of legal status: A self-report delinquency study. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1791229&;show=abstract
Morgan. D. L. (1996). Focus group. In Hagan, J. &; Cook, K. S. (Eds.). Annual Review of Sociology, 22:129-152.
Morris, A., &; Maxwell, G. (Eds). (2001). Restorative justice for juveniles: Conferencing, mediation and circles. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Mutchnick, R. J., Martin, R., &; Austin, W. T. (2009) .Criminological thought pioneers past and present. Ohio: Upper Saddle River.
Patrick, S., &; Marsh, R. (2005). Juvenile diversion: Results of a 3-year experimental study. Criminal justice policy review,15 (59),58-73.
Perlman, H. H. (1957). Social casework: A problem solving process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Police Service of Northern Ireland. (2007). Equality Impact Assessment Youth Diversion Scheme. Retrieved October 6th, 2011, from http://www.psni.police.uk/summary_of_youth_diversion_eqia.pdf
Polk, K., Adler, C., Muller, D., &; Rechtman, K. ( 2003). Early intervention: and diversion youth conferencing. A national profile and review of current approaches to diverting juveniles from the criminal justice system. Canberra: Attorney-General’s Department, Canberra, Australia.
Porter, O., Jacqui, P., &; Steve, F. (2005). Rural outreach diversion worker program evaluation. A report prepared for drugs policy and services branch, rural and regional health and aged care services diversion, department of Human Services. Victoria, AU.
Posovac, E. J.＆Carey, R. G.(1997). Program Evaluation: Methods and Case Studies (5th Ed.). NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Rodriguez, N. (2007). Restorative justice at work: Examining the impact of restorative justice resolutions on juvenile recidivism. Crime &; Delinquency, 53,355-79.
Rosalie, A., Joseph, H., Guy, S., &; Robert, A. (2001). Social work and social welfare. (4th ed). Washington, DC: Brooks/Cole.
Schur, E. M. (1971). Labeling deviant behavior. New York: Harper &; Row.
Sheppard, C. (2008). Exploring Juvenile Diversion in Ohio: With implications for policy &; practice supporting evidence-based practice and comprehensive strategy- Multi-Systemic Therapy (MST) and wraparound. Retrieved October 6th, 2011, from http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi?acc_num=akron1216824864
Sickmund, M., Sladky, A., &; Kang, W. (2011). Easy Access to Juvenile Court Statistics: 1985-2008. Retrieved October 6th, 2011, from http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezajcs/asp/selection.asp
Steyn, F. (2010). Approaches to diversion of child offenders in South Africa: A comparative analysis of programme theories. ETD Collection: University of Free State.
Strang, H.(2001).Restorative justice programes in Australia: A report to the Criminology Research Council. Canberra: Criminology Research Council. Retrieved from http://www.criminologyresearchcouncil.gov.au/reports/strang/index.html
Taft, J.(1937). The relation of function to process in social casework. Journal of Social Work Process.
Toumbourou, J. W. (1999). Implementing communities that care in Australia-A community mobilisation approach to crime prevention. Australian Institute of　Criminology, 122,1-6.
Trimboli, L.(2000). An evaluation of the NSW Youth Justice Conferencing Scheme. Sydney: New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Attorney General's Department.
Trotter, Chris. (2006). Working with Involuntary Clients - A Guide to Practice (2nd). Chicago: Allen &; Unwin.
United Way of America (1996). Measuring program outcomes: A practical approach. USA: United Way of America.
University of Western Australia , Crime Research Centre. (2007). WA Diversion Program: evaluation framework (POP/STIR/IDP): final report for the Drug and Alcohol Office. Retrieved October 15th, 2011, from http://www.dao.health.wa.gov.au/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download .aspx?Command=Core_Download&;EntryId=238&;PortalId=0&;TabId=211
Wesley, G. J., &; Miller, M. (2012). Juvenile Gangs. In Grigorenko, E. L. (Ed.). Handbook of juvenile forensic psychology and psychiatry. U.S.A: Springer.
 
 
 
 
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

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：823（臺灣：819，外國：4） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1827278 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67642509
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上