论人工生殖子女的法律地位

现代生殖技术的问世大大冲击了人类传统的自然生殖方式，与此同时，也冲击了现代伦理观念，并带来了一系列法律问题。随着人工生殖子女数量的增多，相关法律纠纷也日益增多。因此，本文对于人工生殖的一个基本问题——人工生殖子女的法律地位进行了深入的探讨。着重论述了人工生殖子女的分类，相应的父母子女关系的确定及权利义务关系。同时对代孕母亲所引发的法律问题进行了探讨。     

人工授精中的亲子关系问题研究

人工辅助生殖技术涉及许多法律问题,本文主要关注人工授精技术所生子女在家庭中的法律地位,其中详细分析了如何确定不同情况下同质授精所生子女的亲子关系以及异质授精所生子女的亲子关系问题。     

现代生殖技术的民法学思考

现代生殖技术为我们人类带来了福音,同时也对传统民法提出了挑战。这些挑战突出表现为:自然人的生育权应成为一项重要的民事权利、父母子女关系应当采用新的界定原则、克隆人应当赋予其明确的法律地位等,而传统民法理论无法解决这些问题。因此,丰富和发展民法理论成为当务之急。     

论人工生殖子女父母身份之认定

传统民法中父母子女关系的建立,血缘与怀胎是母亲同时具备的要素,法律上兼以二者作为认定母子关系的指标。随着医学科技的发达,人工生殖技术使得血缘与怀胎间的相连性不再理所当然,不孕夫妻可以借用他人的精卵通过体内或体外受精,使妻孕育分娩子女,甚至可以将不孕夫妻的受精卵植入他人的子宫怀胎分娩,使得人类的繁衍可以在血缘之外的母体进行。生殖科技对现行法律制度提出了诸多挑战,人工生殖子女之父母身份的认定问题尤为突出。为避免因采用特殊规则形成人工生殖子女为特殊子女的不当认识,立法上应力求采用与自然生殖同样的父母认定标准确定人工授精子女的亲子关系,即依据出生事实确定谁是母亲,根据婚生推定及否认制度确定谁是父亲,丈夫的术前同意限制其对子女的婚生否认权的行使;立足于有限性开放代理孕母的观点,确定代孕子女的父母身份时,法律应突破传统的分娩者为母亲的观念,通过特殊立法规定遗传父母为代孕子女之法律父母。     

浅议人工生育子女的法律地位问题

当前,人工辅助生殖技术已被广泛运用,而目前我国法律立法相对滞后。本文从一起人工生育子女继承权纠纷案展开,分析了人工生育子女的概念、种类以及由此所生育子女的法律地位问题。     

对人工生殖子女亲子身份认定规则的思考

对人工生殖子女的亲子身份进行认定时,应以"人工生殖目的"为主要标准,"子女最佳利益"为最高原则,将人工生殖子女的法律地位界定为婚生子女。同质人工体内授精应仍然使用传统的亲子身份认定规则,对异质人工体内授精应当在传统的亲子身份认定规则上有所突破,供卵体外授精的情况下,应以分娩者即不孕夫妻中的妻子为子女的法律母亲,子女的父亲根据婚生推定制度来确认,代孕时应认定委托夫妻为子女的法律父母。     

"母亲"之法律再构建——以代孕为视角

现代医学的发展对法律的冲击日益明显,法律意义上的"母亲"本指有血缘关系或拟制血缘关系子女的上一代唯一女性直系亲属,但随着现代生殖技术的发展,此含义已经不能使子女具有唯一的上一代女性直系亲属.为应对现代生殖技术的冲击,一般情况下认为生者为母.在代孕的情况下,法律上应当首先推定委托人为母亲,当代孕人主张代孕子女的监护权时,代孕人为母亲.     

浅析人工生殖技术带来的基本法律问题

人工生殖技术的产生无疑是二十世纪造福人类的又一重要技术,但是它的出现给社会伦理和现行法律带来了巨大冲击,也是对法学研究的严峻挑战。我们应当对人工生殖技术带来的法律问题进行深入研究以促使法律体系的更加完善,使人工生殖技术更多的发挥其积极作用,推动人类社会的健康发展。     

关于人工生育子女法律思考

随着当代生殖科学技术的发展，尤其是80年代以来，许多国家开始应用人工生育技术，给父母子女关系带来新的变化。关于人工生育子女问题，我国法律尚无明文规定。但在现实生活中却有因人工生育子女而引起的矛盾和纠纷。如何确认亲子关系，解决抚养纠纷，须得完善我国的婚姻家庭立法。笔者仅就人工生育子女问题谈点粗浅的看法。所谓人工生育子女（即人工授精所生子女）是指一切非通过男女之间自然的性行为而使妇女受孕所生育的子女。为了更好地确认人工生育子女的法律地位及其父母子女关系，我们首先对人工授精技术加以分类。人工授精技术可分…     

独身女性运用人工生殖技术生育的法律问题探析

本文主要探讨了独身女性运用人工生殖技术生育的合法性、对子女利益的影响和对社会的影响这几个基本法律问题,并针对这些问题提出了一些建议。     

人工智能时代的专利法:问题、挑战与应对

人工智能作为当前最为尖端的科技成果,对于专利法的挑战是全方面的,既包括人工智能技术本体的专利法律保护、人工智能发明成果的专利法律规制,还涉及人工智能应用工具的专利法律影响问题。造成上述难题的原因包括人工智能的复合性技术结构、人工智能法律客体的本质属性以及人工智能的超强运算能力等人工智能基本特质。为此,应通过优化人工智能技术本身的专利保护模式、开展人工智能自主发明的专利法律规制、创设人工智能应用工具的专利实践指引等措施,实现对人工智能时代专利法律问题的有效应对。     

中医人工智能的伦理风险初探

人工智能是时代进步发展的成果,作为一种先进科学技术在给人类带来方便快捷的同时,随之而来的潜在风险也日渐凸显,尤其是对人类道德伦理的挑战。探讨机器本身的特性,分析其具有的问题和产生原因;探讨如何治理防控是对公众安全的保护也是对人工智能发展方向的人文指导,强化其人文意识确立人类主导地位,坚定医生主体地位显得尤为重要。     

GAMETE DONORS AND MISTAKEN IDENTITIES: THE IMPORTANCE OF GENETIC AWARENESS AND PROPOSALS FAVORING DONOR IDENTITY DISCLOSURE FOR CHILDREN BORN FROM GAMETE DONATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES

The technological advent of artificial reproduction has resulted in a substantial increase of children born from gamete donation. Studies conducted overseas, particularly in the United Kingdom, have explored the controversy as to whether or not such children have the right to know the identity of their donor parents. This article discusses the consequences of donor disclosure and donor privacy for both the parents and children. Currently, there is a lack of U.S. state legislation on the issue. While studies remain inconclusive, research indicates that counseling for the parties involved and the promulgation of state statutes may be beneficial.     

Dodging the Donor Daddy Drama: Creating a Model Statute for Determining Parental Status of Known Sperm Donors

Despite recent innovations in alternative reproduction technology and the increased use of artificial insemination procedures, courts and legislatures have been unable to develop a clear and consistent test to establish the parental rights and obligations of sperm donors. As a result, there are mixed outcomes in cases where intended parents seek child support from an unsuspecting donor or when donors petition the court for visitation with their biological children. This Note seeks to resolve the ambiguity in determining sperm donors’ parental status by proposing a model state statute that makes nonpaternity the default rule. Under the statute, sperm donors would not be subject to any of the parental rights or obligations of a traditional biological father. However, the presumption of nonpaternity could be overcome if the parties agree, in writing, prior to the insemination. Further, the model statute provides an exception to the default rule if the donor has played an active role in the child's life. Adopting this model statute will not only facilitate a market for sperm donation but also make donor rights and obligations clear from the onset.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Today, infants born using artificial reproduction technology (ART) represent more than one percent of children born in the United States annually.
• When a donor is anonymous, the law is clear: the donor is not a legal parent. However, the law regarding known donors is less straightforward. Depending on the state and the particular circumstances, the parental status of a known donor is questionable.
• The ambiguity in the law creates confusion and disagreement among the parties in a donor agreement. By comparing factually similar cases, in which courts interpreted donor statutes with identical language, in completely opposite ways, it is easy to see the unpredictability in ART cases.
• The proposed model statute provides unambiguous legislation that sets out a clear standard to be used in determining the parental status of known donors. If adopted by state legislatures, courts across the country would finally have a consistent rule to apply, leading to less confusion and contradictory rulings.
• The key issue is honoring intentional parentage and the proactive choice to use ART to have a child on one's own terms.

     

SPERM DONOR OR THWARTED FATHER? HOW WRITTEN AGREEMENT STATUTES ARE CHANGING THE WAY COURTS RESOLVE LEGAL PARENTAGE ISSUES IN ASSISTED REPRODUCTION CASES

In recent years, the use of assisted reproduction has risen dramatically in the United States, allowing individuals who face various reproductive challenges, including infertility or absence of a heterosexual partner, to conceive biological children. While assisted reproduction has expanded to meet the needs of these parents, the legal system remains years behind, often leading to complicated child custody disputes between the parties. State legislatures have responded to the call for increased regulation of legal parentage in assisted reproduction in varying ways, although one popular statutory approach requires a known sperm provider to preserve his intention to parent in a written agreement with the woman. This article will argue that written agreement statutes are an effective means for resolving parentage disputes because of their ability to protect pre-insemination intent and encourage private ordering of conflicts among the parties. These issues will be explored through the lens of a recent case decided by the Kansas Supreme Court, In Re K.M.H. , where the court enforced a written agreement statute against a sperm provider despite his equal protection and due process challenges.     

FDA approved? A critique of the artificial insemination industry in the United States

Artificial insemination by donor is becoming an increasingly popular means to achieving parenthood. While the majority of couples use artificial insemination to overcome fertility problems, many recipients use artificial insemination to avoid passing a genetic disease to their children. However, case studies reveal the inherent dangers of artificial insemination, namely the lack of proper screening methods to avoid passing genetic diseases to children born by artificial insemination. State-by-state regulation, federal guidelines, and private adjudication have all proven to be inadequate methods of regulating the artificial insemination industry. Ginsberg proposes federal regulation as the only means of achieving a safe artificial insemination industry. The proposed federal regulation would include better genetic screening, a more efficient national sperm donor system, and limited disclosure to recipients of artificial insemination and their children. These measures would help to ensure that couples using artificial insemination get what they expect--healthy sperm, a safe artificial insemination process, and ultimately, a healthy child.     

人类胚胎的法律地位及胚胎立法的制度构建

随着人工生殖技术的发展,体外受精越来越多,而这与传统的体内受精生殖方式有非常大的差别。同时,胚胎干细胞生物技术的发展也为多种不治之症带来了福音。这就涉及到了一个根本性的问题,即体外胚胎的法律地位究竟如何?这一问题与胚胎归属、继承权、侵权损害赔偿请求权以及能否被应用于科学研究息息相关,不明确胚胎的法律地位,这些问题都不能得到很好的解答。关于胚胎的法律地位,在理论上主要存在三种学说,即主体说、客体说和中间说。通过分析国外立法及比较各种学说,以胚胎为中间体的基础上,可以就我国未来关于胚胎立法的制度构建提出具体建议。     

非法人工授精行为之社会危害及其防范

人工授精手术一方面满足了不孕不育家庭对生育后代的渴望,另一方面也成为某些人谋取非法利益的手段。在巨大利益的引诱下,买卖人体胚胎、强取人体胚胎、非法实施人工授精手术等违法犯罪行为不断增多,极大地危害了正常的医疗秩序和人体生命健康,同时引发了许多伦理道德问题。对于这些危害较为严重的行为,有必要及时利用刑事法律予以规制与防范。     

PROTECTING VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND THEIR CHILDREN AFTER DIVORCE

This article discusses the issue of domestic violence in the postdivorce context and how abused women who have children with their abusers are at a particular high risk of becoming victims of this phenomenon. It discusses recent state legislation that has been enacted to deal with the problems of domestic abuse after divorce. More specifically, this article looks at the American Law Institute's proposed model statute on child custody and visitation and how it addresses the issue of domestic violence both during and after divorce. This article will also explore potential flaws of the American Law Institute's model as well as some ideas for further development in this area .     

Transgender Family Law

Transgender people face unique issues in parentage, custody, and divorce cases. Many transgender people are raising children or wish to do so. This article examines the main legal issues facing transgender people who become parents by giving birth or impregnating a partner, through assisted reproduction, through marriage, by raising a child, or through adoption. In the past, some courts viewed a parent's gender transition as a sufficient reason to terminate parental rights. Today, the law has shifted to provide much more security for transgender parents, though significant bias still remains, particularly in divorce and child custody cases. In addition, many states have not yet fully addressed how to determine the legal parentage of children born through assisted reproduction. I analyze the legal landscape for transgender parents and spouses and offer critical suggestions to ensure that transgender people are able to protect their families and their parental rights.