宗教自由在臺灣兒少基督教安置機構的實踐與挑戰

Abstract

本研究旨在探討台灣基督教兒少安置機構中，宗教自由的實踐樣貌與倫理挑戰，並聚焦於工作者與離院兒少對機構宗教理解、經驗與回應。研究採用詮釋學取向，透過深度訪談12位機構工作者與4位離院兒少，分析宗教自由如何在照顧現場中被詮釋與實踐，並檢視工作者對評鑑制度中宗教規範的看法。 本研究首先歸納出八種類型，包含四種宗教自由詮釋（信仰傳遞型、賦能型、形式自由型、批判型）與四種對評鑑制度的立場（肯認評鑑型、協商務實型、低調堅守型、批判評鑑型）。進一步，研究將此統整發展出三個核心類型：制度信任者、彈性實踐者，以及信仰守護者。 此外，研究發現兒少對宗教的認同多建構於與工作者之間的關係互動，這深刻影響他們對「宗教自由」的主觀感受。多數兒少表示「機構很自由」，但實際上機構多採預設參加的形式，兒少選擇空間常受到集體管理與獎懲制度限制。兒少若欲退出，須提出理由並展現足夠的自律與成熟，安置機構多缺乏以尊重自主為原則的「報名登記制」（opt-in）設計。 本研究建議：（一）建立宗教活動的知情同意與退出機制，改採opt-in報名登記制；（二）明訂不得將宗教參與與福利獎懲掛鉤；（三）將宗教自由納入機構評鑑，要求具體制度、文件與規範；（四）強化宗教與多元文化訓練，提升工作者的倫理敏感度與反身性；（五）重視原生家庭的角色與意見，並於機構營造尊重多元差異、允許選擇的友善空間。

This study investigates the practices and ethical tensions surrounding religious freedom in Christian residential care institutions for children and youth in Taiwan. Focusing on both institutional workers and care leavers, the research examines how religious culture is understood, experienced, and negotiated within these settings. Adopting a hermeneutic approach, the study draws on in-depth interviews with 12 staff members and 4 care leavers to analyze how religious freedom is interpreted and implemented in everyday care, as well as how staff respond to regulatory frameworks related to religion. The findings first identify eight typologies—four interpretive approaches to religious freedom (faith-transmitting, empowerment-oriented, formal-freedom, and critical) and four stances on evaluation policies (evaluation-affirming, pragmatic-negotiation, quiet-adherence, and critical-evaluation). These are further synthesized into three overarching categories: institutional trusters, flexible practitioners, and faith guardians. The study reveals that children's religious identification is primarily shaped by their relational experiences with caregivers, rather than through religious teachings or activities alone. While many described the institution as “free,” participation in religious activities was often assumed rather than chosen, constrained by collective routines and reward-punishment systems. Opting out typically required justification and demonstrations of maturity, indicating a lack of autonomy-based opt-in mechanisms. This study recommends: (1) implementing informed consent and withdrawal procedures for religious activities through an opt-in model; (2) prohibiting the linkage between religious participation and welfare incentives; (3) integrating religious freedom into institutional evaluation criteria with clear policy documentation; (4) enhancing cross-disciplinary training on religion and cultural diversity to improve ethical sensitivity; and (5) recognizing the role of birth families in shaping religious identity and fostering a respectful, choice-based environment for faith practice.