Skip to Content

Issue 50 (10/2022)

Table of Contents
  • Main Focus
  • Work Report
  • CPD courses and activities for RSWs

    Main Focus

    Apply for renewal of registration as early as possible in accordance with the Ordinance

    According to section 20 of the Social Workers Registration Ordinance, the registration of a registered social worker ("RSW") shall remain in force for 12 months and any application for renewal of registration shall be made to the Registrar in specified form no earlier than 3 months before the expiry date and not later than 28 days prior to the expiry. Such statutory time limit is called Renewal Window".

    Taking the expiry date of 30 November 2022 as an example, the opening of the Renewal Window to fall on 1 September 2022 for accepting renewal applications for registration until the closure of window on 2 November 2022. On the day or one working day before or after the closure of renewal window, the Board will issue a statutory 28-day-deadline notification by registered mail to those social workers who have not submitted their application for renewal of registration. Upon the expiry of the final deadline, for those RSWs who have not applied for renewed on time, the Registrar will remove their names from the Register. If RSWs wish to resume their registration status, they are required to re-apply for registration.

    Therefore, the Board calls on social workers to apply for renewal of registration as soon as possible within the time limit of the renewal window as required by the Ordinance, so as to avoid the de-registration due to any delay situation. In addition, in order to reduce the usage of paper and minimize postal errors or delays, the Board urges social workers to apply for registration renewal through the Online Registration System and settle the payment by electronic means.

    Qualification for registration includes ordinarily residing in Hong Kong

    According to sections 17(3)(a) and 20(4) of the Social Workers Registration Ordinance, an applicant shall not be registered as a social worker unless he is an ordinarily resident in Hong Kong at the time of application for registration (including renewal of registration). Sections 22(1)(c) and 22(2) of the Ordinance also point out that if any social worker ceased to be ordinarily resident in Hong Kong for a period of 2 years or more, the Board shall not consider him to be ordinarily resident in Hong Kong and the Registrar may remove his name from the register if the Registrar becomes aware of this. For the definition of ordinarily resident in Hong Kong, please refer to the website of the Immigration Department of the Hong Kong Government    ( Therefore, if the Board Office notices that a social worker may not meet the “ordinarily resident in Hong Kong” requirement, it may request such applicant for renewal of registration to submit more information for follow up.

    Points to note for registered social workers to report charges and convictions

    According to section 24 of the Social Workers Registration Ordinance, a registered social worker who has, at any time on or after the date of the statutory declaration made by him, been charged with or convicted of any offence, shall as soon as reasonably practicable serve a notice in writing to the Board. Registered social worker should not wait for renewal to report charge or conviction. For details, please refer to Newsletter Issue 47.

    Social Workers Registration Ordinance (Amendment of Schedule 2) Notice 2022

    According to section 17(4)(b) and (5) of the Social Workers Registration Ordinance, the Board shall refuse to register a person as a registered social worker who has been convicted in Hong Kong of any offence coming within any of the descriptions specified in Schedule 2, except all the members for the time being of the Board, after considering all the circumstances of the case, resolve that he be so registered.

    Regarding the offences listed in Schedule 2 of the Ordinance, the Secretary for Labour and Welfare announced through the Gazette on 16 May 2022 that "An offence endangering national security" would be included in the Schedule 2 of the Ordinance from 22 July 2022. According to a written explanation from the Labour and Welfare Bureau, "offences endangering national security" are not limited to offences under the  National Security Law, but also include other offences of this nature stipulated in Hong Kong's existing legislation (i.e. "secession", "subversion", "terrorist activities" and "collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security", and "treason" and "incitement" under the Crimes Ordinance (Cap. 200) (see HKSAR v. LAI CHEE YING [[2021] HKCFA 3] and HKSAR v. NG HAU YI SIDNEY [[2021] HKCFA 42].

    The Board will perform its statutory responsibilities in accordance with the revised Ordinance, and will consult legal advice on relevant matters and provide further explanations to social workers as necessary.

    Consultation Session on the Proposal on the Mandatory Reporting Requirement for Suspected Child Abuse Cases

    Seven members of the Social Workers Registration Board attended the online Consultation Session on the Proposal on the Mandatory Reporting Requirement for Suspected Child Abuse Cases on 16 September 2022, and expressed their suggestion on the mandatory reporting requirement for suspected child abuse cases as proposed by the Government. 


    Currently, the Government proposed imposing a statutory duty upon designated professionals to report to the relevant Government authorities specified categories of child abuse/neglect cases, the non-compliance with which will lead to criminal liability. Since social workers are one of the category of practitioners to be designated as mandated reporters in the proposal, would every social worker please pay attention to the development of the relevant legislation process so as to fulfill the related statutory obligation once the related ordinance has been enacted, as well as to ensure early identification of and effective intervention into child abuse/neglect cases.

    Appoint co-opted members for the Committee on Qualification Recognition

    The functions of the Board include setting and reviewing the qualification standards for registration as a registered social worker, as well as assessing whether the academic qualifications awarded by institutions are based on the above-mentioned standards. Therefore, the Board has established the Committee on Qualification Recognition to carry out related functions. Since the work of qualification recognition involves the interests of different stakeholders, the Board believes that the composition of the Committee should also include teaching staff of tertiary institutions, management of employing agencies, fieldwork supervisors and frontline social workers, so as to listen to the different voices of the field. In view of this, the Board of this new term has started the nomination of co-opted members in April 2022, and appointed the following persons as co-opted members in June for a tenure of office until 15 January 2025:

    Dr. FONG Fu-fai, Steve
    Dr. KWAN Chi-kin 
    Ms. TSOI Man-yu
    Dr. WOO Chi-wood



    Work Report

    1. Supplementary Explanation of the 8th Edition of the Principles, Criteria and Standards for Recognising Qualifications in Social Work (“PCS”)

    The 8th edition of the PCS was published on 15 April 2021 and came into effect on 1 September 2022. In order to facilitate institutions and relevant stakeholders to have a clearer understanding of the requirements for small class teaching, designated staff and transitional period, the Board has previously issued supplementary explanations to the institutions and uploaded the documents to the Board’s website for public reference.

    Editing progress of the second series of "Casebook of Disciplinary Inquiries"

    At the end of 2020, the Board set up an Editorial Sub-committee for Casebook of Disciplinary Inquiries with the aim of drafting the second series of the "Casebook of Disciplinary Inquiries". Up to now, the Editorial Sub-committee has reviewed the inquiry cases over the past 10 years, and has completed the preparation of the first drafts of more than 30 selected cases. In the future, the Editorial Sub-committee will further review the draft articles and integrate the forewords and conclusions for each nature area. 

    Qualification Recognition

    The following are the social work qualifications that are undergoing recognition review:

    • Caritas Institute of Higher Education: Bachelor of Social Work (Honours)(2022/23)
    • School of Continuing and Professional Studies, the Chinese University of Hong Kong:Higher Diploma in Social Work(2022/23)
    • City University of Hong Kong: Bachelor of Social Sciences in Social Work(2022/23)
    • City University of Hong Kong: Master of Social Work(2021/22)
    • The Hong Kong Polytechnic University: Bachelor of Arts (Hons) in Social Work(2022/23)
    • Hong Kong Community College of The Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityHigher Diploma in Social Work(2022/23)

    The Board is also preparing to conduct Qualification Assessment for two proposed new programmes.


    4. Promotion Work

    During the last half-year, staff of the Board Office introduced the work of the Registration Board to the social work students of the following institutions through online or physical visits: 

    • Gratia Christian College(Final Year):20
    • Caritas Institute of Higher Education(Final Year):280
    • University of Hong Kong(Final Year):140
    • School of Continuing and Professional Studies, the Chinese University of Hong Kong(Final Year/First Year):80
    • UOW College Hong Kong(Final Year/First Year):120
    • The City University of Hong Kong(Final Year/First Year):140
    • Hong Kong Baptist University(Final Year):140
    • The Hong Kong Polytechnic University(First Year):55
    • Hong Kong Community College of The Hong Kong Polytechnic University(Final Year):50
    • Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education (Sha Tin) of the Vocational Training Council(Final Year):65
    • Hong Kong College of Technology(Final Year):80
    • Hong Kong Shue Yan University(Final Year):40
    • Total:1210

    Introducing the New Registrar

    Greetings! I am OR Pak-kin, and I took up the post of Registrar in April 2022. Before joining the Social Workers Registration Board (“the Board”), I took up work of different categories including hospital’s supporting services, quality assurance of course and course administration.

    My undergraduate major is not social work, but I recall that I took an elective course conducted by the Department of Social Work when I studied my undergraduate programme many years ago. Although I almost totally forget the content of the course that I learned, I still remember the following scene: the teacher invited two classmates to the stage in batch each time, and asked them to face each other and imitate the action of the other like an image in a mirror. The requirement of this game seemed not difficult, yet only another classmate and I could perform the effect of an image in a mirror. As such, I could still remember such scene as of now.

    Under the circumstance in which I almost totally forget the content of the course that I learned, I try to subjectively interpret the said game as follows: the interaction between humans would not be effective and efficient if it relies only on the observation and contribution from one party. But if both parties could observe each other and respond, then this might promote the cooperation of both parties, and might even establish rapport.

    I need to work with different people in the Board. Besides staff members of the Board office, Board members, members of the disciplinary committees, etc., perhaps there would be a chance that I would communicate with you, a person currently reading this article, in a certain occasion in the future. Perhaps you are currently receiving the information from this article unilaterally, but, in a certain occasion in the future, I believe that I could have bilateral communication with you, and hope that in this communication, you and I could continue experiencing the growth of life.

    CPD courses and activities for RSWs

    The Board has set up a platform on its website to list the professional development activities uploaded by the listed organizers. As the listed activities do not need to be recognized or screened by the Board, you are advised to enroll the CPD activities for Social Workers in careful manner.


    (as at 6/10/2022) 

    Total Number of RSWs27,469

    Gender Distribution

    Male8,610 (31.3%)
    Female18,859 (68.7%)

    Qualification for Registration

    Recognized bachelor degree or above18,666 (68%)
    Recognized diploma8,713 (31.7%)
    90 (0.3%)

    Statistics on Complaint Cases (since establishment)

    Total Complaint Cases received717  
    Total Cases for Disciplinary Inquiry154
    Total Established Cases37

    NoteAs some cases are still in the preliminary stage or disciplinary proceedings, the above figures are not expressed in proportion.


    Articles contributed by RSWs

    (The content of the following articles is solely the author's personal opinion and does not represent any position of the Board. The language of the article is published according to the original manuscript, no translated version is provided.)



     社會工作者面對最具挑戰性的任務之一,是將抽象的價值觀轉化為實際的行動,以提供每天實務工作的指引。威廉斯(R.M. Williams)(Reamer2006)認為價值是行動選擇的標準,當價值的界定是明確的和完整的,則價值會成為行動的判斷、取向與選擇的標準。社會工作者必須清楚社會工作的價值,因為最終實務工作者需要面對社會工作職責的倫理兩難時,在不同的價值中作出行動選擇。具體而言,香港社會工作者的主要任務是將《註冊社會工作者工作守則》(下稱「工作守則」)所陳述的核心價值,轉化為有意義的行動。同時,我們不可以認為社會工作價值是固定不變的,有些社會工作價值會隨著社會環境的變化而面對挑戰。社會工作者註冊局在2020年就《工作守則》和《實務指引》的修訂建議作公眾諮詢,其中一個目的,相信是應對和回應社會環境的變化,尤其當倫理兩難出現時,能提供明確的指引。

    工作守則和實務指引應有多種功能,包括對社工的啟發、社工的一般倫理規範、提供對社工的道德約束,若是太特定,守則會變得大而無當(Kultgen1982)。因此,要求工作守則和實務指引對每一倫理兩難的情境提供明確的指引是不合理的(Corey, Corey & Callanan2002)。另一方面,社會工作者有時卻必須在不相容的選擇中作出決定,令痛苦最小化(minimization of suffering)(Popper1966)。在此情況下,工作守則除了提供倫理抉擇的處理原則外,還有保護社工免於外界的制約,提出一套標準幫助處理社會工作者不當行為的申訴事件。

    問題來了,是否只談介入的行為準則而無視該行為所依據的價值體系,便能增強社工的介入效果?最早與社會工作相關的倫理守則里茲文(Richmond, M)在1920年提出的,而美國社會工作者協會(NASW)在1960年完成制訂第一個包含了一連串社會工作價值理念的倫理守則Reamer2006)。事實上,實務是價值的具體化,根據這些價值,社會工作者才得以決定其行為是否合符社工價值(Levy1976)。若果社工實務的原則是要將社工價值表現出來,社會工作者必能辨認社工的價值基礎與實務工作原則的關連性,而這關連性反過來影響著每天的實務工作(Perlman1976)。因此,工作守則或實務指引若不談介入行為背後所依據的價值觀念,根本難以有效地實踐社會工作的介入和行動。

    問題又來了,工作守則和實務指引是否越具規範性,便越容易處理倫理兩難的情境?行為的效益主義(act utilitarianism)和規則的效益主義(rule utilitarianism)是其中兩個協助社工在倫理兩難上作出抉擇的原則(Gorovitz1971)。行為的效益主義認為,行為的正確性是決定於針對某個案或某特定行為所帶來的結果,不需要再探究因此而產生隱含的意義。而規則的效益主義認為,並不是單獨思考某個案或某特定行為,而是思考一般性通則來決定行為所帶來的長遠影響。例如行為的效益主義者會主張,若能阻止福利金的詐取,則可將福利金節省下來並用於更多需要幫助的人。因此,在告發福利金詐取還是為案主保密的兩難處境中,前者的結果較佳,因而社工會抉擇告發。然而,規則的效益主義者會主張,雖然不保密而告發案主的詐取行為會帶來好處,但是不保守案主的秘密所帶來的傷害會大過益處,因為不保密會使案主對社會工作者失去信心,因而不利於專業服務的提供。他們考慮的是保密還是告發行為能產生較大的效益,而不是考量特定個案的效益。一方面,效益主義是價值信念,另一方面,不同的生活經驗、價值信念、政治意識型態會帶來不同的介入行為和影響,由此可見,若工作守則和實務指引越具規範性,便更難處理倫理兩難背後所涉及的價值信念。


    問題又再來了,一個持續在社會福利界的挑戰是社會工作者對於各類倫理理論觀點的運用、衝突的價值與職責的優先順位缺乏共識。既是這樣,何不只談介入的行為準則而無視該行為所依據的價值體系?「無道德取向」(amoralistic orientation)(Reamer2006)將實務工作視為純技術性而不涉及任何價值信念,這取向避免運用有關價值的觀念,只以機械式的行為作為工作的準則。然而,這個取向並非價值中立的,因為他們提出的機械式行為準則其實已隱含了其預設的價值信念基礙。因此,只談介入的行為準則而無視該行為所依據的價值體系,或不重視社會工作的價值體系,本身已經是充滿預設的價值基礙。


    社會工作是一種道德事業(ethical career)(Siporin1989),雖然社會工作價值已經歷不同的發展階段,但是它並不是完全靜態的與未受挑戰的。社會工作價值反映出不同的政治意識型態,且最終影響到實務工作的本質。社會工作的介入行為,本身是離不開社工價值的。因此《註冊社會工作者工作守則》和《實務指引》的修訂,更需要各位同工一起更新「排列價值與倫理義務的優先次序」,這將更貼近時代的需要。


    Corey, G., Corey, M. & Callanan, P. (2002). Issues and ethics in the helping professions (6th ed.). California: Wadsworth.

    Gewirth, A. (1996). The community of rights. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Gorovitz, S. (ed.) (1971). Mill: utilitarianism. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

    Kultgen, J. (1982). The ideological use of professional codes. Business and professional ethics journal, 1(3), 53-69.

    Levy, C.S. (1976). Social work ethics. New York: Human Sciences Press.

    Perlman, H.H. (1976). Believing and doing: values in social work education. Social casework, 57(6), 381-390.

    Popper, K. (1966). The open society and its enemies (5th ed.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Reamer, F.G. (2006). Social work values and ethics (3rd ed.). Columbia University Press.

    Siporin, M. (1989). The social work ethic. Social thought, 15(3/4), 42-52.










    打開招聘廣告,大多會見到宿舍家長工作大致如下「持有本地認可社會工作文憑或同等學力及必須為註冊社工;中學會考 / 文憑試中、英文合格 。策劃及執行宿生自理、肌能訓練及康樂活動,需輪夜工作」。(2022, 明報JUMP)

    宿舍家長之所以需要社工的資歷,相信是相信社工可以做到個案工作,協助學校社工,成為學生的個案經理。為學生家長,以及其他跨專業的專業人士提供溝通的橋樑,以學生為中心,就着學生的福祉,協調其他跨專業的介入,為學生提供舒緩困境的方式。筆者認同前線扶抱、餵食、功課輔導和協助執行治療專業提供的肌能訓練的工作等,可以令工作員更了解特殊學校學生的需要。但是,知道了他們的需要之後又如何呢? 相信各位同工在評估後,都會在後續的工作上,希望可以通過個案輔導小組方式或是跨專業協調會議等介入方式,協助學生解決他們的需要。

    香港基督教服務處培愛學校宿舍部舍監張詠芝坦言,難以聘請宿舍家長的其中一個原因是職責問題,擁有註冊社工資歷的宿舍家長,工作範疇比一般社福機構的社工更廣,不止要為學童籌辦活動小組、負責個人成長及輔導工作,平時更會貼身照顧宿生的起居飲食,「餵孩子吃飯、餵飲水、洗澡、處理大小二便,部分工作跟照顧工作員很相似,簡單而言是甚麼都關你事。」。(2019, 巴士的報)



    全職人手不足令特殊學校宿舍須依靠替假員工,宿舍家長在此情況下只能幫忙維持最低限定的運作,無法抽空為學童辦活動開小組(2019, 張詠芝)隨著離職的同工愈來愈多,現時雖然疫情平緩了,社交規定也沒那麼緊迫,但是學生的生活仍未能正常。學生的起居照顧得到滿足後,才有空間疏導學生的心理發展、社交訓練等需要。




    對宿舍家長的身體健康造成的影響,不單止是肌肉勞損,更有機會面對工傷。我們的工傷率頗高,有的社工面對這個工作環境難免會感到很挫敗,做到嗌救命。(2019, 張詠芝) 筆者在特殊學校工作8年,腰患也因此而長久不能完全康復。近年紛紛見到同事離職或轉職,其原因也多為身體健康考慮。特別是女同事的離職或轉職,原因是: 是希望可以安胎生育。

    建議: 增加宿舍家長助理/宿舍照顧員

    教育局及學校應該考慮,招聘宿舍家長以外的支援人員。例如: 招聘宿舍家長助理或者起居照顧員。協助宿舍家長處理基本的學生照顧。若宿舍家長有時間,處理學生的家庭問題、活動需要、跨專業合作,協助學生發展。

    現時特殊學校的宿舍架構,編制主要以宿舍家長為主。若果學校或者教育局,願意在特殊學校的編制內進行改革,相信可以舒緩宿舍家長人手不足。根據立法會教育事務委員會2021 3 5 日會議, 特殊學校為學生提供的教育及寄宿服務優化措施。提及加強特殊學校的專業及輔助人員的支援,用以招聘相應的臨時輔助人員,當中廚師和看守員屬於宿舍部編制。(2021, 立法會教育事務委員會)









    1.      巴士的報,20191028日,「特殊學校宿舍招聘難,業界擔憂掀「搶人戰」」取自:

    2.      教育局,「202122 學年學生人數統」,P89-P92 , 取自:

    3.      立法會教育事務委員會,2021 3 5 日,特殊學校為學生提供的教育及寄宿服務, 取自:

    4.      HK012019,觀點「智障學童宿位不足-土地問題其實是官僚問題」,取自:


    完善兒童院舍服務檢討 加快強制舉報虐兒立法






    現時,每間綜合家庭服務中心有1.5SWO,負責督導約14-17 ASWOSWA,平均每位社工手頭正跟進約40 個個案不等,當然活躍個䅁越多,工作量會增加。年年亦處理超過70個個案,而且大都涉及法庭個案,工作壓力較大。在面對有特殊教育需要兒童及特殊背境的原生家庭時,要處理的問題就會更為複雜,宜增設資深社工編制,讓有經驗有能力的同工分擔督導前線同工的權責和工作,並在日常提供貼身及時的指導。同時,政府可在設立強報機制時,考慮增加社工權限以作執法所用。而幼稚園方面,教育局亦應積極考慮縮短現行的缺課七日需通報的時間,以更快速地阻止悲劇發生。



    1.     三級舉報機制應有清晰指引:雖然現時只有達到一級(即嚴重情況)才須舉報;然而,並非每宗個案例都能作出清晰區別,特別是複雜個案,有機會同時處於不同機制範疇。希望部門在解說三級機制運作時詳加說明,並列舉案例輔助解說。

    2.     提供合理配套設施:當局應同步提供完善配套,例如增加署方和警方特別熱線,提供已受訓人員協助處理個案,因始終法律條文並非所有從業員能全面掌握。

    3.     應著重「預防」而非補救措施:儘管機制如何完善和有效,我認為「預防和及早識別」虐兒個案才是最有效保障兒童的最佳措施,因此,宜及早識別危機家庭,定期探訪一些曾經吸毒、酗酒、有情緒問題的孕婦、單親、再婚甚或父母較為早婚的家庭等等。盡早識別有問題家庭,及時伸出援手,防止悲劇發生。





    2019年,筆者參與了在葡萄牙舉行的Lisbon Addictions Conference,眾多主要來自歐洲各國的戒毒工作者及政策研究者前來分享他們的工作經驗。


    最令我留意的,是歐洲有研究組織開始採用污水驗毒,以推算歐洲主要城市的吸毒人口和趨勢。例如,以20112018年的數據,英國的Bristol、荷蘭的Amsterdam,可卡因吸毒人口比例最多;全歐洲最多人口比例濫用派對藥物MDMA的城市,是荷蘭的Amsterdam;德國的Dresden,吸食安非他命的人口是最多。事實上,污水驗毒結果,的確是一個可取的數據去研究某國家主要大城市的吸毒趨勢,亦由於它較能快確紀錄吸毒趨勢的變化,這會有利相關部門在治療服務方面作出適合的調整。(Eropean Drug Report: Trends and Developments, 2019








    202112月中童樂居,發生了一宗院舍職員涉嫌集體虐兒事件,66名童樂居員工中有34(51.5%)被捕及起訴,當時全院64 (最高服務名額是104)接受全托照護院舍服務中的40(60%)兒童懷疑曾遭受虐待;由於案件部份被拘捕疑犯的刑事偵訊仍然在進行中,為免影響司法公義,本文不會討論本案的案情、偵訊、和法庭就部份被告人審結的判刑結果作評論。


    • 涉及虐待兒童法例中的持份者呈報責任刑事化;
    • 社會福利署對受政府資助社會福利服務監管的盡職審查責任;
    • 社會福利署署長作為童樂居全託照顧兒童的法定監護人的盡職審查責任;
    • 全托照護幼兒院舍的管理文化和機構官僚制度;及
    • 政府資助撥款金額與社會福利服務機構實際營運需要的差距。

    筆者退休前曾在香港從事殘障成人院舍服務長達27年,就本事件中被公眾遺忘的焦點,社會大眾和社福業界對SEN醒覺 (awareness),例如童樂居的服務對象中03歲的特殊學習需要幼兒 (下簡稱SEN幼兒) 的辨識和適切的照護服務。


    • 目前SEN幼兒的發現比率在全球均有上升趨勢,例如主要三大障礙:學習障礙3:10; ADHD 4:10; 自閉譜系2:100 (即每10100位兒童中可能出現的障礙數目)
    • 童樂居的幼兒收納標準中,部份來自原生家庭照顧者未能或不適合提供適切照護幼兒,其中估計有部份源自SEN (1)
    • 在法庭已審結及判刑2宗案件的3名被告,所披露的虐兒案情,兒童被虐前展示(觸發虐待)的行為,例如:將被子(sic )跌在地上、將手中的玩具放在頭上、遭女童撞了一下等行為;除了主審法官黃官認為年幼的小朋友以四肢探索世界,將被子掉到地上再正常不過,不明白體罰有何管教功能。” (2) 這等行為在殘障人士服務界也可能被解讀為需關注行為” (Challenging Behaviour) ,亦是SEN幼兒常見的行為模式;
    • 香港保護兒童會具體成立日期不詳,但其網頁稱由20046月起童樂居亦提供「緊急住院服務」,間接表示童樂居成立起碼達18年或更長時間。如果說童樂居職員對SEN醒覺欠缺敏銳,甚至是推論香港保護兒童會管理層缺乏對SEN認識,相信亦非為過。
    • 2022818“有認罪被告在九龍城法院判刑。署理主任裁判官黃雅茵指,涉打兩童的30歲女被告將犯案歸咎於機構工作文化及衝動,屬無坦白面對罪責的表現。黃官自言不評論文化為何,也是被告自己放棄專業操守,作出極端錯誤行為” (3)。 從上述被告自辯的機構工作文化,可以是支持上述職員對SEN醒覺欠缺敏銳,和管理層缺乏對SEN認識。要不用說童樂居多達34(51.5%)職員被捕及起訴佐證。

    覺醒運動 (SEN Awareness Movement) 是筆者自創和索源於自閉譜系覺醒運動 (Autism Awareness Movement) “,暫時在香港社福學術和業界中尚不見討論。自閉譜系覺醒運動正式起源於2008年美國及全球最大的自閉譜系家長組織,自閉症之聲(Autism Speaks) 向聯合國倡議及成功訂定每年42日為<世界關顧自閉日> World Autism Awareness Day,以促進全球各地政府、機構、和社會大眾認識、關顧和支持自閉譜系人士及其家庭。


    • 加強社福幼兒服務前線從業員對SEN的辨識和適切的照護技巧;
    • 加強社工訓練院校和社福業界對SEN最新的基本知識和技巧;
    • 加強醫護對03歲嬰幼兒早期SEN的辨識;及
    • 設立全港性SEN的發生率統計數據,以合理調配政府資助以滿足服務需要。


    (1)  香港保護兒童網頁資料 


    童樂居 (初生至3歲幼兒)



    (2)  童樂居虐兒案|涉打兩童   官斥職員棄專業操守   判囚4個月10

    原文網址: | 香港01 18/08/2022

    (3) 童樂居女職員認虐3童 官稱難信如此極盡侮辱行為 判囚約7個月

    原文網址: | 香港01 | 2022-07-22




    1. 來稿應與註冊局的職能或社會工作專業有關。 

    2. 來稿不代表註冊局立場,作者文責自負。 

    3. 投稿者須為註冊社工,並須提供真實姓名、通訊地址、電郵及聯絡電話。投稿者可要求不刊登真實姓名。 

    4. 來稿可以中文或英文撰寫,以中文2000字或英文1500字為限。 

    5. 註冊局有全權決定是否刊登來稿。 

    6. 註冊局擁有最終編輯權。 

    7. 註冊局不會向投稿者提供任何形式的酬勞。