法院社工在家事事件法與家暴防治法中，是協助弱勢的當事人進入司法的重要角色。除了連結社福資源與提供當事人情緒支持外，同時也是司法與社政體系的重要橋樑。一般來說，法院社工駐點於法院，但在當法院人員對法院社工有不同的期待，或是對於事件的看法與社工價值衝突時，會造成社會工作者角色緊張的情境。 本研究以質性研究方式，探討法院社工在法院服務時的經驗，透過「角色中介模式」(role of Episode)瞭解法院社工在駐點過程中，如何與法院人員互動，並從中瞭解社工不符合理期待的原因與狀況。 本研究發現，法院社工在家事訴訟中建立「法律資訊提供者」、「支持與輔導」、「提供社會福利資訊」、「人身安全的協助者」。當法院人員與社工對於社工的想像與專業，雙方所期待的樣貌有不同時，法院社工會開始質疑自身專業角色。「角色緊張」的狀況時常存在於法院社工或其他服務場域中。會發生此狀況為兩個因素：「角色期待落差」與「高度與法院系統合作」。在角色期待落差的部分，因社工人員的專業價值與法學訓練差異，造成彼此對於法院社工角色的想像有所不同；而因「公辦民營」的經營的狀況，社工人員並非司法專業人員，但需要與法院人員高度合作，因此在自我定位上需要更清楚。 在因應角色緊張過程中，除法院社工需與法院人員建立良善的互動模式，重新建立法院對於社工的想像。實質上可建議法院舉辦相關研討會來討論與社工合作的模式，且在專業訓練上應有認識法院社工相關課程，其避免法院人員對於社工有不合理的期待。 本研究藉由看見法院社工的角色在司法工作中會出現與法院溝通的困境，著重於法院社工期待能得到專業上的尊重。 Social workers in Court play an important role in Family Act and Domestic Violence Prevention Act, trying to make parties accustomed to our judicial system. Meanwhile, we connect social welfare resources and provide emotional support for parties like a bridge between judicial and social system. Generally speaking, role strain happens when judicial employees have different role expectations for social workers, or internal social workers value wasn't fit/satisfied for situations in events. The study demonstrates experiences of social workers in Court by qualitative approach and role of episode perspectives, analyzing by interactive scenarios among judicial employees like judges parties and social workers. Trying to understand the reasons for role strain: why social workers are unexpected in the court? Social workers in Court play as information providers, emotional supporters, sources connecters and safety guards for the parties. The study discovered that the social workers in Court will be confused and express self-doubt when expectation conflicts comes among judicial employees. Role strains often happened especially in social workers in Court, the lower/weaker role compared to other court employees. Role expectation conflicts and lower position than other court employees are two major reasons for role strain. The internal value/perspectives and professional training are different from other court employees makes expectation conflicts. Role expectation gap and high cooperation with the court are two main reasons for the conflicts. Role expectation gap was caused by different backgrounds and values between social working and law professional. Entrusted privatalization social working agency takes a clearer social workers self-positioning among high coopearation roles in the court. The lower position is caused by private-owner but court working hiring system and non-law-degree professional for social workers. Social workers in Court manage the role strain by building reciprocal interactions with court employees and new cooperation systems like symposiums holding for solving conflicts and irrational-expectations. The study focuses on the social workers' professional role, serving as friendly partners in judicial process and should be respected equally, not only an assistant in the court.
