Juvenile Correctional Policy Enforcement: Taiwan Case__臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

來源文獻資料
摘要
外文摘要
引文資料

題名：	Juvenile Correctional Policy Enforcement: Taiwan Case
書刊名：	中國行政評論
作者：	林秋蘭
作者(外文)：	Lin, Chiu-lan
出版日期：	2006
卷期：	15:2
頁次：	頁93-126
主題關鍵詞：	少年事件處理法；少年矯正政策評估；少年犯；少年矯正學校；少年輔育院；Criminal Law of Juvenile；Juvenile correctional policy evaluation；Uveniledelinquency；Juvenile correction school；Juvenile reformatory school
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	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:0 共同引用:0 點閱:30

本研究為探討一個社會事件，引發修法的合適性。記得八十五年十一月新竹少年監獄暴動後，受到各界關注，在前立委謝啟大召集各有關人員經研討之後，認為少年人格未臻成熟，過去採「教刑並重」不合適，宜採「以教代刑」，遂而引發八十六年十月二十九日修正「少年事件處理法」，共修正了八十二條條文。直接影響到少年矯正政策之機構性處遇方式。在新法修正後，少年涉及刑事案件被判刑或拘役後，原在新竹少監執行，改至高雄明陽中學接受矯正教育。少年涉保護事件裁定感化教育，原在輔育院執行，改在新竹誠正中學執行。但桃輔與彰輔須於九十二年完成改制。本研究主要目的是探討： 1．修正少年事件處理法後，新少年矯正政策採「以教代刑」、「重罪輕罰」，是否能通過法律比例原則與社會公平正義的批判。 2．新的少年矯正政策績效，能否優於舊的少年矯正政策？本研究共分為六章，試圖先從德、美、日、中等四國少年法立法的原則目的來觀其理論基礎的意涵，復而採用執行評估與成果評估的方法（包括少年再犯率、成本效益分析與少年行為改變），以解析此項新少年矯正政策（指誠正與明陽）是否合乎時宜，並與舊少年矯正政策（指桃輔與彰輔）作比較，最後運用政策論證的方式來評斷該政策的良莠和基本邏輯是否合理。研究方法：採文獻分析法、問卷調查法、晤談法、官方犯罪統計及政策論證等方法。研究樣本採分層隨機抽樣，收容少年有效樣本計有249名，員工有效樣本計有77名。並以自編之「收容少年能力與行為改變自我評估表」及「少年矯正機構領導幹部基層人員工作滿足度調查表」，作為檢驗政策目標達成的指標。問卷資料運用SPSS軟體來處理，統計方法採用person積差相關，Cronbach α係數，因素分析，t檢定，one-way ANOVA單因子變異數分析，及x^2等。研究結果： 1．各國少年法立法皆採「教刑並重」、「重罪重罰」，我國獨採「以教代刑」。 2．新少年矯正政策機構收容少年之再犯率比舊少年矯正政策機構稍低，大約只有1%至4%差距，卻要花兩倍多的成本。即平均每一收容少年每年花費金額明陽與誠正為56萬元，而桃輔與彰輔為26萬元。 3．少年行為改變方面桃輔優於誠正、彰輔和明陽。 4．新少年矯正機構雖擁有較佳的人力、財力與設備，但因組織結構設計不良，誠正面臨每年四個學期制的壓力，老師和學生都無喘息的機會；明陽中學倒是在重罪輕罰的看法上，教育人員與矯正人員理念不合，前者主張寬，後者主張嚴；桃輔與彰輔面臨九十二年改制的相同命運，員工多不希望改制，除了改制後某些職位會提高官等還有一點吸引力之外，其餘皆無，因此整個組織呈現不安的氣氛。最後將研究發現，作政策論證的邏輯思考，「重罪輕罰」、「以教代刑」皆難以通過法律比例原則與社會公平正義的批判。故此，建議將來修正少年事件處理法時恢復「教刑並重、重罪重罰」，俾能增進少年矯正政策之效能。未來研究宜從本土犯罪原因、法理學、法哲學來衡量罪與罰之標準。

以文找文

In November, 1996 Hsin-chu Juvenile Prison happened a riot, which drew the public attention on juvenile correctional policy. Then, the Taiwan Legislature revise Juvenile Criminal Dispose Law with educational mechanism instead of punishment in 1997. Therefore, the revised Law impacts the position of correctional organization. For example, a juvenile criminal sent to junior high school to take correctional education instead of sending to juvenile prison or juvenile reformatory school. The study was designed to evaluate whether correctional performance of "education instead of punishment" is better than that of "balance between education and punishment" and the achievability of correctional policy goal by "education instead of punishment" alternative. The paper contained 3 parts, including: ◎ Overview of the juvenile Law's principles, purposes and theory basis of German, USA, Japan and Taiwan. ◎ Using repeat rate, cost and benefit analysis and behavior change, etc. To evaluate the execution and result performance. ◎ Compare with that before the Law revised. Data were collected: ◎ Using records research, questionnaire, interview. ◎ Using sampling; juvenile sample 249, correctional organization staff 77. ◎ Using "juvenile in prison capability and behavior change self evaluation table (or questionnaire)" and "correctional organization staff work satisfaction investigation table (or questionnaire)" designed by the author. The data provided some support for the contention that 1.Only Taiwan use "education replace punishment", other countries use "education and punishment balance", serious crime heavy punishment. 2.Juvenile criminal after new correctional organization's correction activities re-commit rate is 1-4% less than the old correction organization. But the cost is doubled. 3.As for behavior change, Taiwan Tao-Yuan juvenile reformatory school is better than that junior high school. 4.Manpower, equipment and financial: new correctional organization is better. But their organization structure is not good enough. 5."Education replace punishment" and serious crime light punishment do not meet the proportion principle or justice.

以文找文

期刊論文
1.	Ding, Dao-Yuan(1964)。The Research in Problems of Juvenile Delinquency。Law Series，9(4)。
2.	Li, Mao-Shen(2004)。The Basic Legislative Strategy of New Juvenile Delinquent Dispose Law。Law Series of National Taiwan University，28(2)。
3.	Li, Mao-Shen(1995)。The Drafting Process and Explanation for the draft of Juvenile Delinquent Dispose Law in 1995。Criminal Law Magazine。
4.	Li, Mao-Shen(1992)。The Theory and Practice of the Criminal Law of Juvenile in Japan。Law Series of National Taiwan University，21(2)。
5.	Lin, Chung-Yi(1993)。The Analysis of Policy Evaluation and Reestablishment of Methodology。Chinese Administration Commentator，2(2)。
6.	U. S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs(1999)。Bureau of Justice Statistics。Census of Jails。

學位論文
1.	Kao, Wei-Wen(1994)。The Research in Diversion Disposition of Juvenile Case(碩士論文)。National Taiwan University，Taipei。
2.	Wu, Ming-Chin(1983)。The Values and its Related Factory of Juvenile in Taiwan(博士論文)。National Normal University，Taipei。
3.	Tsai, Kun-Hu(1995)。The Research in Legislative Principle of the Criminal Law of Juvenile--the Focus on Procedure Protection(碩士論文)。National Taiwan University，Taipei。

圖書
1.	Fischer, F.(1995)。Evaluating Public Policy。Chicago：Nelson-Hall Publishers。
2.	Austin, James、Johnson, Kelly D.、Gregoriou, Maria(2000)。Juveniles in adult prisons and jails: a national assessment。Washington, DC：BJA Bureau of Justice Assistance。
3.	Chang, Nai-Liang(1983)。The Research in the Criminal Law of Juvenile in the United States。Taipei：Chinese History and Antique Supply Company。
4.	Chen, Hui-Chih、Ma, Chuan-Chen(1993)。The Evaluation of the Plan Avoid from Juvenile Delinquency。Taipei：The Commission of Investigation, Examination and Development。
5.	Chen, Meng-Chuan(2001)。The Chance of Juvenile Judiciary Protection System--Refer to the System of the Criminal Law of Juvenile in United States。Taipei：Executive Yuan。
6.	Chiu, Hou-Cheng(2002)。Quantification Research and Statistics Analysis。Taipei：Wu-Nan Publisher。
7.	Chu, Chi-Hung(1994)。Public Policy。Taipei：San-Ming Publisher。
8.	Dai, Hua、Cheng, Edit Shiao-Shi(1991)。Justice and Related Issues。Taipei：Chun-Shan Humanities Research Station：Central Research Institute。
9.	Ding, Dao-Yang(2002)。The Explanation of the Latest Juvenile Delinquent Dispose Law。Taipei：San-Ming Publisher。
10.	Hsieh, Guang-Chun(1982)。The Latest Practical Psychology and Statistics。Causing：Fu-Wen Publisher。
11.	Hsu, Chun-Jin(2000)。Criminology。Taipei：San-Ming Publisher。
12.	Hsu, Chun-Jin、Ma, Chuan-Chen(1997)。The Investigative Research in the Reason of Juvenile Delinquency and Preventive Strategy。Taipei：Criminal Problem Research Center：Ministry of Justice。
13.	Hsu, Chun-Jin(1996)。The Reason of Juvenile Delinquency。Taipei：Wu-Nan Publisher。
14.	Hsu, Fu-Shen(2001)。The Handout of Criminalistics。Taoyuan：Central Police University。
15.	Ho, Chong-Wen(1994)。The Comparison of Judiciary Policy for Juvenile Criminal Case between Taiwan and the United State。
16.	Law Research Institute, Ministry of Justice(1998)。Criminal White Book。Department of Publish, Ministry of Administration。
17.	Lin, Chi-Dong(1978)。The Discussion of Reason and Law in Juvenile Delinquency。Taipei：Li-Ming Publisher。
18.	Lin, Chin-Hsiang(1987)。The Study of the Juvenile Delinquent Dispose Law。Taipei：Wu-Nan Publisher。
19.	Lin, Dong-Mao(2001)。A Thought of Criminal Jurisprudence in Epistemology。Taipei：Wu-Nan Publisher。
20.	Lin, Chung-Yi(2001)。Administration。Taipei：San-Ming Publisher。
21.	Lin, Chung-Yi(1994)。The Theory and Practice of Policy Analysis。Taipei：Qui-Hsin。
22.	Liu, Jih-An(1978)。The Criminal Law of Juvenile in Taiwan and the United States。Taipei：Han-Yuan Publisher。
23.	Liu, Jih-An(1972)。The Summary of the Juvenile Delinquent Dispose Law。Taipei：San-Ming Publisher。
24.	Ma, Chuan-Chen、Lin, Chiu-Lan(1993)。Comparative Research in Personality, Environment, and Handling Capability of the Juvenile who Taking Amphetamine, Property and Violent Crime and Common Juvenile。Taipei：The Commission of Investigation, Examination and Development, Executive Yuan。
25.	Wang, Yu-Ming(1997)。Social Crime and Analyses of Jurisdiction Questions。Taipei：Sociology Series。
26.	Yeh, Chong-Hsin(1992)。Psychological Test。Taipei：San-Min Publisher。
27.	Ma, Chuan-Chen(1988)。The Research in Psychological and Environmental Factors of Juvenile Delinquency。Nan-Tao：The Research Institute, Taiwan Province Government。
28.	Miller, D.(1987)。Political Thought。New York Publishers。
29.	Rawls, John(1971)。A Theory of Justice。Taipei：Structural Group。
30.	Schwarzenegger, C.(2001)。The Debate about the Reform of the Juvenile Law--Juvenile delinquency as a result of and, cause for social change。University of Halle。
31.	Shen, Yin-Ho(1987)。Comparative Research of Juvenile Crime in Taiwan and Germany。Taipei：Wu-Nan Publisher。
32.	Tseng, Chin-Bao(1998)。Jurgen Habermas。Taipei：Shen-Chi Publisher。
33.	U. S. Utah Government(2005)。Juvenile Justice Services。
34.	Dunn, William N.(1993)。Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction。Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey：Prentice-Hall。
35.	Lincoln, Yvonna S.、Guba, Egon G.(1989)。Fourth generation evaluation。Sage Publications。

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	感化教育之少年矯正學校改制後之在校適性化學習、出校學籍轉銜、離校追蹤等問題
2.	我國少年感化教育執行困境與展望--以兒童權利公約為中心
3.	臺灣少年矯正學校暨輔育院對身心障礙犯罪學生之教育服務現況
4.	從少年犯之司法處理流程析論觀護立法之重要性:兼論我國少年事件處理法之修正方向

無相關博士論文

1.	少年犯之處遇問題與對策

無相關著作

1.	毒癮愛滋收容人生活適應之研究

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫