性侵害加害人刑後強制治療處所設置地點爭議與解決之研究

The Study for the Location Disagreement and Its Solution for the Post-Imprisonment Mandatory Treatment of Sex Offenders in Taiwan

自從2005年新修刑法與侵害防治法引進美國危險性侵者法案(SVPA)，對高危險性侵者在服刑期滿前或社區治療輔導中若經評估再犯危險仍高者可由法院裁定接受刑後強制治療，其期間至再犯危險降低為止，修法後暫時收容於台中監獄內之培德醫院。但經2011年最高法院刑事裁定不應設於監獄。然尋找地點卻屢屢碰壁至今。2020年底釋憲文799號明令須於三年內搬出監獄且設於醫院。本研究即在釐清設置地點爭議並找出解決的方法。本研究採取便利抽樣之方式，對象為中南部某國立大學166名大學生，男生67人而女生99人。問卷結果顯示大學生普遍贊成刑後強制治療與社區輔導治療（各95.2%與87.6%）。但對強制治療處所設於離自己家約500公尺內之態度上，大學生普遍傾向不同意（44.4%）與一半一半之猶疑（36.7%）此顯示有鄰避效應；再問若監獄內牆設有一棟建築物做為刑後強制治療處所，大學生約一半傾向沒有安全感（53%）且約四成不同意（39.9%）與一半一半之猶疑（31.0%）。刑後強制治療處所若有職缺，優先聘僱社區人員之態度上，大學生同意者（45.2%）比不同意者（38.0%）較多一些。再請設置位置六選項來排序發現受試者最偏好將強制治療處所設於監獄內牆，其次依序是本島市區醫院、北中南東各選一間醫院、外島之醫院、本島鄉間醫院。男女樣本之差異研究也有所呈現。

In 2005, Taiwan passed the Sexual Violent Predator Act (SVPA), allowed the court can order the still dangerous sex offender be in post-imprisonment treatment no matter the one had already served most of the time in prison or already in community treatment program. The current place is allocated in a hospital within a prison, but the location was banned by the Supreme Court in 2011.
In 2020, the Supreme Court decided the SVPA law is constitutional, but the location is unconstitional and should relocate in 3 years. However, it can not find a suitable place allowed by various local people till now, even after several tries.
The purpose of this study is to find the solution ideas of location by asking college students. Totally 166 students, including 66 males and 100 females, in a national university were sampled to fill a questionnaire by a convenient sampling method.
It was shown that 95.2% and 87.6% of samples agree the SVPA and community treatment program, respectively. But it showed 44.4% disagree and 36.7% hesitation, while asking SVPA location 500 meters nearby their houses, which similar to NIMBY (not in my backyard) effect. Moreover, while asking the SVPA site located by the side of inner wall of prison. 53% of samples response insecurity, and 39.9% were disagree and 31.0% were hesitative. 45.2% of sample agree the community people can be hired in priority, but 38.0% disagree.
While giving six options for SVPA sites for the respondents, the priority was as the follows: by the side of prison, one mental hospital, mental hospital spread 3 sites northern-middle-south Taiwan, then the mental hospital in rural Taiwan.