入住自費安養機構老人對其居住環境依附情形之初探--人生歸途中最後能掌控的一方天地

• Main Authors: 黃萃文, Huang, Tsui-Wen
• Language: 中文
• Published: 國立政治大學
• Subjects: 老人; 自費安養機構; 地方依附; 家的意義; elderly; congregate housing; place attachment; meaning of home
• Online Access: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/cdrfb3/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&i=sid=%22G0094254020%22.

在高齡化社會中，老人居住安養的議題愈形重要。長久以來，「與子女同住」一直是國人心目中最理想的老年居住安排方式，但隨著老年人生活自主性與教育程度的提升，傾向不與子女同住的比例亦逐年上升，而選擇「自費安養」型態的老年人口也逐漸增加。本研究希望藉由入住自費安養機構老人本身的觀點，深入瞭解他們與此一居住環境的互動經驗及情感依附，並思考如何使居住環境有「像家」的感受。據此，本論文之研究目的在於：一、探討老人遷住自費安養機構的決策過程。二、分析入住自費安養機構老人與居住環境的互動關係。三、探索入住自費安養機構老人對居住環境的依附情形。四、依據研究結果，提供建議作為推動老人住宅政策與實務工作之參考。 本研究使用質性取向的研究方法，以台北市某家自費安養機構作為研究場域，採用半結構式的深度訪談法進行資料蒐集，共計訪談十三位老人，年齡介於七十一至九十二歲之間。主要的研究結果如下： 一、老人入住自費安養機構是一連串的過程，包括需求的引發、資訊的取得、貨比三家與考量要件、以及最終的決定，而其中遷居過程的參與程度和做決定的自主程度愈高之老人，對於新居的看法愈為正面。 二、在實質環境方面，安養機構最大的特色在於具有多元化的空間設施，老年住民可在個人寢室空間從事獨立活動，在公共空間有較多人際接觸的活動，至於機構外部的活動則受限於老人的行動能力、害怕外部環境潛藏的危險性或是擔心跌倒意外。此外，安養機構經常安排各種休閒活動和社會活動，是入住老人相當有利之處，並為老人帶來許多正面的功能與感受。在社會環境方面，「功能距離的鄰近性」與「社會人口背景的同質性」是老年住民互動關係之主要影響因素；而工作人員是協助老年住民維持獨立生活的支持者；原先的社會支持網絡則是提供老年住民情感支持的主要來源。 三、老年住民對於居住環境多數感到喜歡和滿意，但是否將居住環境視同為「家」，則受到「老人對家的定義或觀念」以及「是否仍擁有原本的住家」兩個因素所影響。綜合而論，老年住民的依附類型主要可歸納為三類：（1）我找到一個理想的地方，將在這裡終老餘生；（2）這裡是一個適合居住的地方，可以協助我維持獨立生活；（3）缺乏情感，希望將來有機會重新安排居住環境。 === On an aging society, it has become an important issue that how people live in their old age. For a long time, “living with children,” to Taiwanese people, has been the best way of living arrangement in later life. However, with the enhancement of autonomy and the upgrading of educational level, more and more elderly tend not to live with their children, and some of them choose to live in congregate housing. From the viewpoint of the elderly living in congregate housing, this study aims to understand their interaction with the living environment, their emotional attachment to it, and how to make the environment feel like a home. Accordingly, the purposes of this study are as following: first, examine the decision-making processes of older adults relocating from home to congregate housing; second, analyze the interactive relationship between the elderly residents and their living environment; third, explore the emotional attachment of the elderly residents to their living environment; forth, based on research findings, provide suggestions for the elderly housing policy and the practitioners. This study employs qualitative research approach, and data collection is gotten from a congregate housing in Taipei, including semi-structured in-depth interviews with thirteen elderly residents aging from 71 to 92. The study findings are listed below: First, relocation is a series of process, including the demand for initiation, information acquisition, comparison, consideration, and the final decision. In this process, the more participation and the more autonomy the elderly have, the more positive their comments for the new residence will be. Second, in physical environment, a wide range of space is the most prominent feature of congregate housing. The elderly residents could engage in independent activities in the individual dwelling units. They would have more interpersonal contacts in the public space. As for outdoor activities, the elderly might be restricted by their mobility, for fear of the potential dangers of the external environment, or falling accidents. Besides, the elderly get many benefits from the leisure and social activities in congregate housing. In the social environment, the interactive relationship between the elderly is influenced by the vicinity of the functional distance and the homogeneity of residents. Staff members of congregate housing help the elderly maintain independence, and original social support networks provide main emotional support to them. Third, most elderly residents are fond of and satisfied with their living environment. Nevertheless, not all of them consider this environment as their home. Viewing it as a home depends on how they define the meaning of home and whether they have self-owned housing. Overall, the attachment type of these elderly residents can be divided into three categories: (1) I found an ideal place to stay throughout my lifetime; (2) this is a suitable place for me to live, and it can help me maintain independence; (3) I have no affection for this place. If given the opportunity, I will try to rearrange my dwelling place.