台灣兒童權利現況與相關因素探究:以兒童主觀調查為本

Abstract

為了掌握台灣兒童權利落實狀況，本研究本土化韓國兒童權利指數，製作一份台灣版指標問卷來蒐集兒童主觀意見。該調查以比例機率抽樣法，隨機抽樣台灣113所小學，分析了3,793位六年級學童的兒童權利相關問題回答。本研究以發展情境論作為研究之核心理論依據，分析兒童權利保障環境(家庭、學校、社區)、權利經驗(生存權、發展權、受保護權、參與權)和發展結果(身體、認知、社會情緒與行為、主觀幸福)的相關性。以回答以下研究問題: 一、台灣兒童認為自身權利的落實情況為何？二、其發展結果是否與權利保障環境相關？三、發展結果是否與其權利經驗有關？ 研究結果顯示，2022年台灣兒童權利指數的總平均為72.83分（百分制），整體而言，兒童權利的落實仍有顯著的改善空間。兒童權利經驗中的四大權利，僅有參與權不及格，為59.88分，其中「參與活動」要素得分最低，僅47.67分。而「參與活動」要素中，最低分的兩個指標為「參與政策活動」和「參與交流活動」，得分為27分。但與成人想法不同的是，兒童主觀感受中的受保護權得分高達94.37分，此外，生存權為71.22分;發展權得分65.83分;發展結果為69.53分;兒童權利保障環境為78.22分。 本研究採用階層迴歸分析，結果顯示，在控制人口統計變項與權利保障環境變項後，處於良好權利保障環境並擁有較佳權利經驗的兒童，其發展結果表現相對更佳。進一步分析指出，預測兒童發展結果的顯著因素包括權利保障環境中的家庭與社區，以及四項權利經驗──生存權、發展權、受保護權與參與權。此一結果驗證發展情境論（Developmental Contextualism），強調兒童發展受到多層次環境與經驗交互作用的影響。 文末提出八點議題討論: 一、兒童與成人對兒童權利落實的認知有落差; 二、受保護權與參與權的矛盾; 三、參與權不及格，在於活動參與偏低; 四、權利經驗和發展結果的認知有性別差異; 五、兒童發展結果得分低，肇因於學業自信心不足; 六、學童學業壓力大，而且運動不足; 七、發展權中的「休閒」與「家人關係」仍有進步的空間; 八、兒童的自殺念頭亟需重視，父母角色很重要。在政策意涵方面，為了落實兒童權利，建議政府推動兒童友善城市、透過加強與民間組織合作來促進兒童的社會參與機會，以及確保人民能有效監督政府施政。

To understand the current status of children’s rights implementation in Taiwan, this study localized Korea Children’s Rights Index and developed a Taiwan-specific version of the questionnaire and indicators to collect children’s subjective views. We collected subjective opinions from 3,793 sixth-grade students across 113 randomly sampled elementary schools. Grounded in the theory of developmental contextualism, this research examines the correlations among the children’s rights protection environment (family, school, community), their rights experiences (right to survival, development, protection, and participation), and their developmental outcomes (physical health, cognition, socio-emotional and behavioral, and subjective well-being). The main research questions examined children’s perceptions of rights implementation and the relationship between their developmental outcomes, protection environment, and rights experience. The study found that in 2022, Taiwan Children’s Rights Index had an average score of 72.83 out of 100, indicating substantial room for improvement in the overall realization of children’s rights. Among the four core rights experiences, only the right to participation scored below the acceptable level, with an average of 59.88. Within this category, the “participation in activities” component received the lowest average score of 47.67, with the two lowest-performing indicators being “participation in policy activities” and “participation in exchange activities”, scoring just 27. Interestingly, unlike adults’ perceptions, children’s subjective experience of the right to protection scored remarkably high at 94.37, while survival was 71.22, development 65.83, developmental outcomes 69.53, and the protection environment 78.22. This study employed hierarchical regression analysis and found that, after controlling for demographic and protection environment variables, children with better rights protection and rights experience showed more positive developmental outcomes. Key predictors included family and community environments, as well as all four rights experiences. This finding confirms Developmental Contextualism, highlighting the interactive influence of multi-level environments and experiences on child development. The study highlights several issues: a perception gap between children and adults on rights implementation, the low score and paradox surrounding participation rights, and the need to address children's academic pressure, lack of exercise, and mental well-being (including suicidal ideation). Policy implications include promoting child-friendly cities, enhancing social participation opportunities through NGO collaboration, and ensuring public oversight of government policies.