非親密關係家庭暴力致命危險評估量表建立研究

Development and Validation of a Lethality Risk Assessment Scale for Non-Intimate Family Violence

近年手足及姻親、對尊親屬之暴力占三分之一，且年年增加，至2021年佔全體通報37.4%，這群統稱非親密家庭暴力至今仍無致命危險評估量表。本研究之目的即在建立此量表。本研究以第四代危險評估之作法，即RNR（risk-need-responsivity）將蒐集並篩選出有預測效力之靜態與動態因素建立量表、並提出相應改善方案。本研究考慮地域與族群特性蒐集台北市、苗栗縣、彰化縣、雲林縣、高雄市、花蓮縣六縣市。以所設計經焦點團體討論之量表草稿於2021／10-11收集所通報之非親密家暴案件，共1205件，有致命行為佔6.47%，於2022／4-5再追訪被害人以追蹤有無再致命行為及再犯，發現各為1.67%與21.0%。本研究發展出三個量表。第一個是致命危險評估量表10題，供首次接案時工作者填。效度為ROC=.77，屬中高預測效度。第二、三個是預測接案後半年內有無致命暴力評估量表與有無再打行為評估量表各3與6題，由工作者接案後每3個月評填1次。第二個量表之效度為ROC=.79，屬中高預測效度。第三個量表之效度為ROC=.88，屬高預測效度。最後在量表末端附上建議實務單位引用「善意溝通六問句」，其原理為人際衝突都來自彼此都有沒被對方顧到的需要而氣憤，故訪查時詢問雙方的哪些需求沒彼此顧到，並問怎樣圓融雙方不舒服，使能在各單位協助下漸進改善。

In recent years, violence against siblings, in-laws, and ascendants has accounted for approximately one-third of all domestic violence cases and has continued to increase annually, reaching 37.4% of all reported cases in 2021. This category, collectively referred to as non-intimate family violence, still lacks a lethality risk assessment instrument. The purpose of this study was therefore to develop such an instrument. Following the fourth-generation risk assessment approach, this study adopted the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) framework to identify and select static and dynamic factors with predictive validity for scale construction and to propose corresponding intervention strategies. Taking into account regional and ethnic characteristics, data were collected from six cities and counties in Taiwan: Taipei City, Miaoli County, Changhua County, Yunlin County, Kaohsiung City, and Hualien County. Using a draft instrument developed through focus group discussions, data were collected from 1,205 reported cases of non-intimate domestic violence during October to November 2021. Among these cases, 6.47% involved lethal behaviors. Follow-up interviews with victims were conducted during April to May 2022 to examine the occurrence of repeated lethal violence and recidivism, which were found to be 1.67% and 21.0%, respectively. Three instruments were developed in this study. The first was a 10-item lethality risk assessment scale, designed for practitioners to complete at initial case intake. Its validity was ROC = .77, indicating moderate to high predictive validity. The second and third instruments were a 3-item scale for predicting lethal violence within six months after intake and a 6-item scale for predicting repeated assaultive behavior, respectively; both were designed to be completed by practitioners once every three months after case intake. The second scale demonstrated a validity of ROC = .79, indicating moderate to high predictive validity. The third scale demonstrated a validity of ROC = .88, indicating high predictive validity. Finally, at the end of the instruments, this study recommends that practice agencies adopt the“Six Questions of Benevolent Communication.”The rationale is that interpersonal conflict often arises because both parties feel anger when their needs are not acknowledged or addressed by the other. Accordingly, during case inquiry, practitioners are advised to ask each party which needs have not been met by the other, and how the discomfort of both sides may be more harmoniously addressed, so that gradual improvement can be achieved with assistance from relevant agencies.