當前國內外已有許多實證研究證實目睹婚姻暴力對於兒童的情緒、行為、社會功能等面向都會形成負向的影響。然而，因暴力家庭的變動性大、隱密性高等特質，使此類兒童不易進入社政的服務體系中。因此，教育系統一線的辨識與處置角色之發揮便相形重要。本研究以台北縣市國小班導師作為研究對象，藉由問卷調查法瞭解其對於目睹婚暴兒童之辨識能力，以及在處置上相關資訊，包含：對處置原則的瞭解、對於適合作為教育系統之責任的服務項目認知、處置中遭遇的困難、以及因應而生希望獲得之社政體系的協助。

本研究共發放問卷353份，回收之有效問卷為287份，有效問卷總回收率為81.3%。依據描述性統計和邏輯迴歸分析，發現以下研究結果：
1. 台北縣市國小班導師對於兒童目睹婚姻暴力的「風險程度高」之特質案例，辨識的正確率高於目睹婚姻暴力的「風險程度低」之特質案例。
2. 台北縣市國小班導師對於「不應對兒童給予過度承諾」、「不應對兒童家庭發生暴力的原因予以解釋」此兩項目睹婚姻暴力兒童的處置原則較不瞭解。
3. 台北縣市國小班導師對於目睹婚暴兒童處置過程中之責任劃分，對於九項服務具有高共識程度。
4. 台北縣市國小班導師認為其在目睹婚姻暴力兒童的處置中，最容易遇到的困
難為「兒童不願意將目睹暴力之事告知班導師」、以及「專業知能不足」。而其最希望獲得的協助包含：專業知能之獲得、多元專業網路系統之合作、與轉介體系之建制此三大面向。
5. 台北縣市國小班導師發現目睹婚暴兒童之管道多透由「兒童主動告知」。此外，在面對目睹婚姻暴力兒童，其最多提供的協助為諮商輔導與轉介。
6. 台北縣市國小班導師對於目睹婚暴兒童之辨識能力、處置原則之瞭解、服務項目之認定、和遭遇的困難，會隨其人口背景變項的不同而有所差異。

針對研究結果，研究者並於文章中提供相關的討論與建議。

Many evidenced researches show that children who are exposed to domestic violence may suffer from some emotional and behavioral trouble. However, the characteristics that violent families possess, such as high instability and isolation, hinder these children from acquiring the services of social welfare system. Therefore, the educational system serves an important role as a frontliner in identifying and interfering exposure to domestic violence. The research focuses on homeroom teachers in elementary schools. Through questionnaire inquisition, the researcher attempts to investigate the teachers’ ability of discrimination and other related information of their intervention. These information include: the understanding of the principles in intervention, the recognition of services suitable for educational systems, the difficulties in intervention, and the assistance from social welfare system these children desire to have.

353 questionnaires were sent out in conducting the research, with 287 questionnaires returned. The response rate is 81.3%. By applying descriptive statistics and logistic regression, we obtain the following researchful results:

1. The research participants’ ability of discrimination is higher in the case in which there is a high possibility that children witness domestic violence than in the case in which there is a low possibility.
2. Two of the principles in intervention, ‘Do not make too much promise to children’ and ‘Do not explain to children why there is domestic violence in their family’ were less understood by the research participants.
3. There are nine services which are regarded as suitable responsibility for teachers by the research participants .
4. The two difficulties that the research participants think they easily encounter are: ’Children are reluctant to tell the teacher that they have witnessed domestic violence ’ and ‘The teacher’ has insufficient professional ability’. On the other hand, the support that research participants desire to get includes the possession of professional ability, the aid of multi-profession system, and the development of referral system.
5. The research participants usually find children exposed to domestic violence through children’s own words. Furthermore, the assistance they provide to children the most are counseling and referral.
6. As the research participants’ soci-demographic characteristics change, their ability to identify children exposed to domestic violence, their understanding of principle in intervention, their recognition of suitable services, and the difficulties they encounter in the process of intervention, may differ.

The researcher hereby offers related discussion and advices.

王佳煌、潘中道郭俊賢、黃瑋瑩譯（2003）。當代社會研究法:質化與量化途。台北：學富文化。（原著出版年：2002年）
內政部（2006）。人生領航員-協助目睹家庭暴力的孩子。台北市：洪文惠。
內政部（2008）。目睹家庭暴力兒童少年實驗性校園教師輔導教案手冊。台北：婦女救援基金會。
各級學校及幼稚園兒童及少年保護與家庭暴力及性侵害事件通報。台北市：教育部http://140.117.147.33/gender/laws/21.htm。
艾詩.葛伯格著（2000）。堅強兒童心靈－我有我是我能。（善牧叢書11譯）。台北：天主教善牧基金會。（原著出版年：1995年）
呂俊宏（2006）。輔導目睹暴力兒童少年過程中可能遭遇的困難與策略。載於財團法人天主教善牧社會福利基金會（主編），目睹家庭暴力兒童少年輔導實務工作坊手冊（34-36頁）。
沈慶鴻（1997）。婚姻暴力代間傳遞之分析研究，國立彰化師範大學輔導研究所博士論文。
沈慶鴻（2001）。由代間傳遞的觀點探索婚姻暴力對目睹兒童的影響。中華心理衛生學刊，14，65-86。
沈慶鴻（2001）。被遺忘的受害者—談婚姻暴力母賭兒童的影響和介入策略。社區發展季刊，94，241-250。
周月清（1997）。臺灣受虐婦女社會支持探討之研究。婦女與兩性學刊，5，69-108。
林振春（1988）。社會調查。台北：五南。
洪文惠（2007）。被遺忘的孩子-淺談家暴目睹兒。載於內政部家庭暴力及性侵害防治委員會（主編），關懷目睹家庭暴力-兒童少年校園教師行動研習會研習手冊（1-23頁）。
洪素珍(2003)。家庭暴力目睹兒童處遇模式之探討-以兒童需求為導向。內政部委託研究報告（編號：091-000000AU701-001）。台北市：內政部。
家庭暴力事件通報統計資料（2007年版）。台北市：內政部家庭暴力及性侵害防治委員會http://dspc.moi.gov.tw/public/Attachment/9299333671.xls。
張淑敏、宋惠娟（2003）。促進高危險兒童的復原力。護理雜誌，50(5)，61-64。
郭靜晃、李芳玲、林玉君（2005）。運用美國社會工作規範(SWPIP)對我國婚姻暴力目睹兒童之社工處遇探討。兒童及少年福利期刊，8，223-240。
陳卉瑩（2003）。兒童時期目睹暴力經驗歷程之研究。中國文化大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
陳怡如（2001）。婚姻暴力目賭兒童處遇現況之探討。社區發展季刊，94，252-266。
陳怡如(2003)。婚姻暴力目睹兒童之因應探討。台大社工學刊，11，129-164。
陳思儒（2005）。婚暴對目睹兒童之潛在影響。諮商與輔導，233，9-11。
陳若璋（1992）。台灣婚姻暴力之本質、歷程與影響。婦女與兩性學刊，3，117-147。
曾慶玲，周麗端（1999）。父母婚姻暴力對兒童問題行為影響研究。家政教育學報，2，66-89。
童伊迪、沈瓊桃（2005）。婚姻暴力目睹兒童之因應探討。台大社工學刊，11，129-164。
黃富源（2000）。警察與女性被害人—警察系統回應的被害者學觀察。台北：新迪文化有限公司。
趙小玲（1999）。國小學童所知覺的家庭暴力與行為問題的關連之研究 。臺東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
蔡藝華（2001）。影響小學教師辨識與通報兒童身體虐待之相關因素探討。國立政治大學心理學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
鄭瑞隆（1996）。兒童虐待及保護服務。周震歐主編，兒童福利（頁143-179），台北：巨流出版社。
戴世玫、楊雅華、郁佳霖（2008）。「看見心傷兒」-實踐以目睹家庭暴力兒童為主體的服務。載於台灣社會工作專業人員協會（主編），追求公平正義社會-社會工作專業的挑戰研討會手冊（105-134頁）。
魏英珠（1995）。受虐婦女介入方案發展暨評估研究。台北東吳大學社會工作研究所碩士論文。
羅斐諭（1995）。一群被遺忘的受害者-目睹婚姻暴力子女。國立台灣大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
Baker, L.L., Jaffe, P.G., Ashboume, L. & Carter, J.(Eds.). (2002). Children exposed to domestic violence:A teacher’s handbook to increase understanding and improve community responses.London. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

Barnett, O.W., Miller-Perrin, C.L., & Perrin, R.D. (1997). Family violence across the lifespan-an introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sages.

Beeman, S.K. (2001).Critical issues in research on social networks and social supports of children exposed to domestic violence. In S.A. Graham-Bermann & J.L. Edelson (Eds.), Domestic Violence in the Lives of Children : The Future of Research, Intervention, and Social Policy (pp.219-234). Washington: American Psychological Association.

Carroll, J. (1994).The protection of children exposed to marital violence. Child abuse review, 3, 6-14.

Carter, L.S., Weithorn, L.A., & Behrman, R.E. (1999). Domestic violence and children : Analysis and recommendations. The future of children, 9 , 4-20.
Edleson, J.L. (1999). Children’s witnessing of adult domestic violence.Journal of interpersonal violence, 14, 839-87.
.
Edleson, J.L., Ellerton, A.L., Seagren, E.A., Schmidt, S.O., Kirchberg, S.L. & Ambrose, A.T. (2007). Assessing child exposure to adult domestic violence. Children and youth services revies, 29, 961-971.

Fantuzzo, J.W. & Fusco, R.A. (2007). Children’s direct exposure to types of domestic violence crime. Journal of family violence, 22, 543-552.

Fontes, L.A. (2000). Children exposed to marital violence:how school counseling can help. Professional school counseling, 3(4), 231-237.

Gewirtz, A.H. & Edleson, J.L. (2007). Young children’s exposure to intimate partner violence: Towards a development risk and resilience framework for research and intervention. Journal of family violence, 22, 151-163.

Groves, B.M. (2002). Community responses to children who witness violence. In B.M. Groves(Ed.), Children who see too much(pp.104-126). Boston: Beacon.

Groves, B.M. (2002). When home isn’t safe: children and domestic violence. In B.M. Groves(Ed.), Children who see too much(pp.50-78). Boston: Beacon

Haynes, N.M. (1996). Craeting safe and caring school communities: Comer school development program schools. The journal of Negro education, 65(3), 308-314.

Kearney, M. (1999). The role of teachers in helping children of domestic violence. Childhood Education, 75(5), 290.

Kenny. M. (2001). Child Abuse Reporting: Teachers perceived deterrents. Child Abuse and Neglect: The International Journal, 25, 81-92.

Kitzmann, K.M., Gaylord, N.K., Holt,A.R., & Kenny, E.D. (2003). Child witnesses to domestic violence: A meta-analytic review. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 71(2), 339-352.

Margolin, G. & Gordis, E.B. (2004). Children’s exposure to violence in the family and community. American psychological society, 13, 152-155.

Matthews, M.A. (1999). The impact of federal and state laws on children exposed to domestic violence. The future of children , 9, 50-62.

Osofsky, J.D. (2003). Prevalence of children’s exposure to domestic violence and child maltreatment:Implications for prevention and intervention. Clinical child and family psychology review, 6(3), 161-170.

Randoplh, S.M., Koblinsky, S.A. & Roberts, D.D. (1997). Studying thr role of family and school in the development of African American preschoolers in violent neighborhoods. The journal of Negro education, 65(3), 282-294.

Straus, M.A. (1991). Discipline and Deviance: Physical Punishment of Children and Violence and Other Crime in Adulthood.Social Problems , 38(2), 133-155.

Wolfe, D.A & Jaffe, P. G. (2001). Prevention of domestic violence: emerging initiatives. In S.A. Graham-Bermann & J.L. Edelson (Eds.), Domestic Violence in the Lives of Children : The Future of Research, Intervention, and Social Policy (pp.283-298). Washington: American Psychological Association.

Zeanah, C.H & Zeanah, P.D. (1989). Intergenerational transmission of maltreatment : insights from attachment theory and research. Psychiatry, 52, 177-196.