身心障礙者權益保障法對庇護工場衝擊之研究-從「離開庇護工場學員」的觀點探討

Abstract

本研究旨在探討身權法頒布後，庇護工場學員離開機構前後的過程，透過質性研究蒐集四位學員離開前後的狀（態）況和歷程，輔以研究者的筆記及相關文件資料等，並運用NVivo第八版質性軟體進行分析，研究結果如下： 一、庇護工場學員離開機構前都有游走各機構的現象，那些機構包括：可領取得津 貼的職訓機構、需繳費的日托機構、以庇護工場為名行日托服務的機構，以及不同職種的庇護工場等。 二、因著學員的離場，家長開始省思，理解的向度從制度面開始，發現配套措施不足，多數家長會延伸到孩子能力不足、情緒不穩等亦是重要的影響因素。 三、不論孩子離場的原因是什麼，家長都有突然、難過、委曲、無奈、混亂、緊張、不知所措等感覺。 四、家長係朝長期的方向安置離場的孩子，孩子本身能力的不足和外在環境的欠缺是兩個主要的考量，前者包括交通、安全、與社會脫節等；後者的考量會引導家長去尋找接納度高、收費便宜、提供補助，或部分工時的機構。 五、帶著心中的希望尋找安置孩子機構的家長，有些會很主動找資源，有些是被動的等待資源。 六、不論是主動或被動的家長，總不放棄自己的「聲音」被聽到：社會接納孩子、政策支持孩子、有桃花源式的「庇護工場」-不用職評、門檻低、交通接送、有補助、部份工時、有愛心等的全人服務。The purpose of the research was to explore the impact of Disabilities Rights Protection Act on sheltered workshop employees before and after leaving sheltered employment. Research was conducted through qualitative method. Data collected, researcher’s notes and other related information were aggregated and analyzed using NVivo version 8 computer software. Results are as follows: 1. Before leaving current institution, sheltered workshop employees all experienced institution changes, moving from one to another. These institutions include: vocational training institutions offering government subsidies, fee charging day activities institutions, sheltered workshops operated by day activity institutions, and sheltered workshops with a variety of occupation options. 2. Parents began to think about the causes as their children left sheltered workshops. Their sought started from policy perspectives, but some of parents furthered their analysis to their children’s lack of ability and emotional stability. 3. No matter the reasons of departure, parents all felt surprised, saddened, suffered wrong, helpless, chaotic, nervous and overwhelmed. 4. When seeking long-term placement for their children who left sheltered workshops, parents had two main considerations, their children’s lack of ability and the inadequacies of external environments. Former consideration includes abilities in areas such as transportation, safety, and social mainstreaming. Latter consideration caused parents to seek institutions that were more accepting, costing less, offering government subsidies or providing part-time job offeres. 5. With great hope, parents sought institutions in which to place their children. However, some parents proactively sought out solutions, while others passively await resources. 6. Whether parents are proactive or passive, one thing they never gave up doing was “voicing” needs, including societal acceptance of their children, policies that support their children and availability of ideal sheltered workshops – holistic services that include no occupational assessment, providing transportation, government subsidies, part-time options and loving staff members.