本研究針對台灣現行情境型伴侶暴力案件處遇經驗進行初探，運用質性研究方式，邀請台北市五位被害人保護服務及三位相對人輔導服務工作者進行一對一訪談，研究成果彙整如下：
情境型伴侶暴力案件服務是從雙方當事人之「互動」去檢視其衝突脈絡，故過程中需陪伴雙方當事人看見自己的想法及需要，對受訪的實務工作者而言(被害人保護服務社工尤是)，基於工作量大無力花長時間予以陪伴，或是雙方當事人無意願面對、處理的狀態下，僅能透過網絡合作或是靠工作者循循善誘提高雙方當事人的危機意識，才提高雙方當事人之服務意願。然面對雙方當事人無意願處理，但又反覆進出保護系統，可能讓工作者為了調查疲於奔命，或對其處遇感到挫折，故提供多元化的訓練給工作者，讓工作者能破除「被害人」、「相對人」的二元對立思考，並能精確的理解服務使用者在生活中面對的困境，透過宣導讓一般民眾能得到不同家庭關係階段所需的知識，增強民眾對於精神暴力的敏感度，即能減少長久無法被解決的衝突演變成暴力呈現的可能。

This study aims to understand about situational couple violence in Taiwan. With qualitative research, five Victims Protection Service and three Offenders Counseling Service social workers in Taipei was invited for one by one interviews. The research results are summarized as follows:
The situational couple violence service is to examine the conflict context from the "interaction" of both parties. Therefore, it is necessary to accompany both parties to see their own thoughts and needs in the process. Due to the heavy workload and the inability to spend a long time to accompany client, especially for Victims Protection Service workers, when both parties are unwilling to face and deal with their conflict reason, only through network cooperation or by workers’ warning can aware the parties violence awareness, Willingness to serve between both parties can be improved. However, both parties do not want to deal with it, but they repeatedly enter and exit the protection system, which may make workers exhausted or frustrated by their treatment for investigation. Therefore, a variety of training is provided to workers so that workers can get rid of "victims." , The dualistic thinking of the "offenders", and the ability to accurately understand the difficulties faced by service users in life, through advocacy, so that the general public can obtain the knowledge needed in different stages of family relations, and enhance the public's mental violence Sensitivity, reduce the possibility that conflicts that cannot be resolved for a long time evolve into violence.

一、中文部分：
王美懿、林東龍、王增勇(2010)「病人」、「犯人」或「個人」?男性家暴「加害人」之再認識。社會政策與社會學刊，14(2)，147-193頁。
王茲繐(2008)婚姻暴力加害人處遇方案對於加害人家庭系統影響之探討。國立臺灣大學社會工作學研究所碩士論文。檢閱自國家圖書館紙本論文。
台北市家庭暴力暨性侵害防治中心(2018)107年家庭暴力安全防護網工作成果報告。網址：http://www.tmps.tp.edu.tw/ezfiles/1/1001/attach/38/pta_1915_1547553_96445.pdf
全國法規資料庫(2015)。家庭暴力防治法。檢自: https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=D0050071
利翠珊、蕭英玲(2008)華人婚姻品質的維繫：衝突與忍讓的中介效果。本土心理學研究，(29)，77-116頁。(Doi:10.6254/2008.29.77)
吳芝螢(2013)家庭維繫服務社工人員之實務處遇探討。臺灣師範大學社會工作所碩士論文。取自華藝線上圖書館系統。（系統編號U0021-0801201418033843）
宋麗玉(2013)婚姻暴力受暴婦女之處遇模式與成效-華人文化與經驗。洪葉出版社。
李依玲(2017)修復式司法運用在家庭暴力案件中之實踐與反思。國立臺北大學法律學系碩士論文。
李易蓁、楊巧鈴(2014)整合社工處遇與修復式司法協助家暴成人保護個案之實務經驗省思-以台南市女權會為例。臺灣社會工作學刊，13，69-100頁
沈慶鴻(2009)弱勢社工服務弱勢案主？！婚暴防治社會工作者實務困境之研究。社會政策與社會工作學刊，13(2)，87-142頁。(Doi:10.6785/SPSW.200912.0087)
林秀雲(譯)(2013)。社會科學研究方法(原作者Babbie E.)。台北，雙葉書廊。(原著出版年：2013)。
唐文慧、廖珮如(2015)超越「加害人」觀點：婚暴處遇男性建制民族誌分析。台灣社會學，25，133-178。(Doi：10.6676/TS.2015.29.133)
徐立德(2018)情境式家庭暴力夫妻之婚姻適應研究。國立嘉義大學輔導與諮商學系研究所碩士論文。
曾瀞儀(2015)親密關係暴力的權力與控制再辯證。國立臺灣師範大學社會工作學研究所碩士論文。
鈕文英(2017)質性研究方法與論文寫作。台北，雙葉書廊。
黃心怡、楊愉安、溫筱雯、林良穗、沈瓊桃 (2016)。都是權控惹的禍？多元化親密伴侶暴力型態之服務挑戰-以大台北地區聲請保護令案件為例。亞洲家庭暴力與性侵害期刊，12 (2)，85-112。
黃雅玲(2011)婚姻暴力中的互為相對人－社會工作者的觀點。國立台灣師範大學社會工作研究所碩士論文。取自臺灣碩博士論文加值系統(https://hdl.handle.net/11296/4g236p)
黃煜文(譯)(2004)。錯的是我們不是我：家暴的動力關係[Insult to injury: Rethinking our responses to intimate abuse] (原作者Mills, L)。台北：商周。(原著出版年：2003)
趙依庭(2016)親密關係暴力與受害者共依附理論。諮商與輔導，363，31-33頁。
衛生福利部保護服務司(2020)。家庭暴力加害人處遇。更新日期：2021/05/31。檢自：https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOPS/lp-1303-105-xCat-cat01.html
衛生福利部保護服務司(2020)。家庭暴力事件通報案件統計。更新日期：2021/4/20。檢自https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOPS/lp-1303-105-xCat-cat01.html。
衛生福利部保護服務司(2020)。家庭暴力被害人保護扶助人次。更新日期：2021/4/20。檢自https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOPS/lp-1303-105-xCat-cat01.html。
衛生福利部心理及口腔健康司(2019)。家庭暴力加害人處遇計畫規範。網址：file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/%E5%AE%B6%E5%BA%AD%E6%9A%B4%E5%8A%9B%E5%8A%A0%E5%AE%B3%E4%BA%BA%E8%99%95%E9%81%87%E8%A8%88%E7%95%AB%E8%A6%8F%E7%AF%84_0054518002.pdf
衛生福利部保護服務司林春燕(2015)家庭暴力相對人服務方案之發展與沿革簡報。網址：file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/1%E5%AE%B6%E6%9A%B4%E7%9B%B8%E5%B0%8D%E4%BA%BA%E5%B7%A5%E4%BD%9C%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E8%84%88%E7%B5%A1%E5%8F%8A%E6%B2%BF%E9%9D%A9_0052310001.pdf
二、外文部分：
Budd K., Burbrink M., Miller J.(2017)Perceptions of Appropriate Court-ordered Sanctions for Situational Couple Violence Offenders：A Pilot Study. J Fam Viol (2017) 32:419–430(DOI 10.1007/s10896-012-9470-0)
Centers for disease control and prevention(2019) Preventing Intimate Partner Violence.網址: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/fastfact.html
Ellis D., Stuckless N., Smith C.(2015) Marital Separation & Lethal Domestic Violence. London : Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Greene K. & Bogo M. (2002) The Different Faces of Intimate violence：Implications for Assessment and Treatment. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy.vol.28,No.4,455-466.
Johnson, M. P. (2008). A typology of domestic violence: Intimate terrorism, violent resistance, and situational couple violence. Lebanon, New Hampshire: Northeastern University Press.
Kelly J.B. &Johnson M.P.(2008) Differentiation Among Types Of Intimate Partner Violence：Research Update and Implications For Interventions. Family Court Review, 46(3), p476 –499.( DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1617.2008.00215.x)
Lawson(2003)Incidence, Explanations, and Treatment of Partner Violence. Journal of Counseling & Development,vol.81,p19-32.
Leone J. M., Johnson M. P., Cohan C. L. (2007) Victim Help Seeking：Differences Between Intimate Terrorism and Situational Couple Violence. Family Relations,56,p427-439.
Nielsen S. (2012). Exploring The Variation Within Situational Couple Violence. College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Degree of Master of Science in Human and Community Development. (Doi：10.1177/1077801215599842)
Nielsen1 S. K., Hardesty J. L., Raffaelli,&Marcela(2016) Exploring Variations Within Situational Couple Violence and Comparisons With Coercive Controlling Violence and No Violence/No Control, Violence Against Women, Vol. 22(2) 206–224.
Roesch P.T., Velonis A.J., Sant S. M.,Habermann L. E., Hirschtick J. L.(2019)Implications of Interpersonal Violence on Population Mental Health Status in a Low-Income Urban Community-based sample of Adult. Journal of Interpersonal Violence.p1-24 (Doi：10.1177/0886260519862365)
Sally A. L. (2010)Review Essay: Returning to Control and Complexity as Central Dynamics in Family Violence. Journal of Family Theory & Review 2, p415–431. DOI:10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00071.x
Stith S.M., Yvonne A.B., Miller M. S., Menhusen E., Morgan C., April F.D.(2011)Vulnerabilities, Stressors, and Adaptations in Situationally Violent Relationships. Family Relations,60,p73-89.(Doi：10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00634.x)

Stith S. M., Spencer C.M., Karen J.R., Farideh, Fatemeh, Ria& Juha(2019) INTERNATIONAL ADAPTATION OF A TREATMENT PROGRAM FOR SITUATIONAL COUPLE VIOLENCE. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 46(2): 272–288(doi: 10.1111/jmft.12397)
Tiwari A., Chan K.L., Cheung, D.S.T, Fong D.Y.T., Yan E.C.W., Tang D.H.M.(2015)The differential effects of intimate terrorism and situational couple violence on mental health outcomes among abused Chinese women: a mixed-method study. BMC Public Health.DOI:10.1186/s12889-015-1649-x