預防性測謊在國外對性侵加害人處遇所採用的抑制取向中，扮演 著關鍵性的角色。我國於2005年修正《性侵害犯罪防治法》後，引進 預防性測謊做爲處遇加害人的措施之一，惟目前國內針對社區處遇團 隊如何運作預防性測謊的實證硏究闕如。爲塡補此一空白，本硏究以 觀護人爲對象，探討其在當前性侵害加害人觀護處遇政策下，與其他 社區處遇團隊成員在預防性測謊上的協同合作經驗，及其所面臨的政 策困境。本硏究採分層立意抽樣法，選取七名觀護人做爲深度訪談對象，並以主題分析法分析質性資料。硏究者共辨識出兩個主題，以回 應本硏究之目的：「持續發展的處遇團隊與一枝獨秀的抑制三角」和 「何去何從？預防性測謊的政策定位」。本硏究發現，社區監督與輔 導會議扮演著一個重要的加害人資訊交流平台，惟該會議仍有其運作 困境，例如有檢察官不甚瞭解預防性測謊的實施目的。此外，性侵害 防治中心人員流動迅速，導致難以建立完整的溝通體系。目前觀護 人、治療師及測謊員三者在互動中各自所發揮的功能強弱，有相當程 度的差異，觀護人的表現在三方的互動中最爲突出。當前預防性測謊 政策的不完整與變動，也影響預防性測謊的實務運作。文末，硏究者 從抑制取向的理論視角，對照本硏究之發現，提出對未來政策發展及 實務工作的具體建議。

Polygraph testing plays a key role in the containment approach used by many countries to handle sex offenders. Such technology was introduced into Taiwan as one of the methods of dealing with sex offenders when the Sexual Assault Crime Prevention Act was amended in 2005. However, empirical research examining how polygraph testing is employed in community-based sex offender treatment is lacking. To fill this void, this study analyzes the implementation of the containment approach in Taiwan by exploring the collaboration between probation and parole officers and other staff of community-based sex offender treatment in using the polygraph and assessing policy barriers experienced by team members. In-depth interviews were conducted with seven probation and parole officers recruited from the stratified purposeful sampling approach. Two themes were identified from interview data using thematic analysis: “A continually developing treatment team and a power-imbalanced containment triangle” and “Where to go: The policy position of polygraph testing in sex offender supervision.” Our findings revealed that the treatment team meetings have provided an important platform for mutually sharing information about sex offenders, but they have faced some difficulties, such as an inadequate understanding of the purposes of the polygraph and a high turnover rate at sexual assault prevention centers, making coordinated communication difficult. The functions undertaken by probation and parole officers, therapists, and polygraph examiners vary, with probation and parole officers playing the most active role during their interactions. The inadequacy and instability associated with current polygraph policies hinder the operation of polygraph testing in sex offender supervision. Finally, implications for policy and practice are addressed based on the theoretical perspectives of the containment approach.