关于代孕纠纷法律问题与代孕制度构建的思考

近年来,因代孕引起的亲权确认纠纷、探视权纠纷逐渐增多,在当前"无法可依"的前提下,代孕协议效力、代孕生育亲子关系应如何让认定?本文将结合国外相关立法、我国国情与实际探究上述问题,并试立足当前法律现状与国情合理构建代孕制度。     

代孕子女监护权归属问题研究

随着人工生殖技术的发展,代孕行为随之产生,同时带来一系列新的社会问题和法律问题,其中关于代孕子女监护权归属问题尤为突出。我国法律虽然规定了普通的监护权认定制度,但对于代孕子女监护权归属没有作出具体明确的规定。随着司法实践中相关判例的出现,代孕子女的法律地位及其亲子关系都需要进一步明确,通过对当前司法实践及现实中代孕子女归属问题的实证分析,尝试以儿童最大利益保护原则结合其他多方因素来解决代孕子女监护权的归属问题是一条可循路径。建议应当完善相关法律制度规定,确立代孕子女监护权原则,不断完善代孕监管,促进类案司法裁判统一,从而实现保障代孕子女的合法权益。     

论“完全代孕”协议的效力及其法律规制

"完全代孕"是真正具有互助、慈善和利他性质的代孕行为。"完全代孕"协议是一种特殊的委托代理合同,是一种具有较强专属性的身份性契约。在现行法律框架内应适用合同法的有关规定,对于其中涉及亲权和抚养权转移问题的,则应当适用婚姻法的有关规定。未来立法应当通过严格限定代孕行为的主体资格,规范"完全代孕"协议的内容,规范代孕协议的订立程序,规定"完全代孕"协议的解除条件和程序等,将"完全代孕"协议纳入法律规制的范畴。     

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.     

离婚协议违约金的理论澄清与司法认定

离婚协议违约金条款所具有的身份属性决定了《民法典》合同编第585条对其不具有完全的可适用性。离婚协议违约金虽然兼具惩罚性与赔偿性，但惩罚性更为突出。其所保护的利益并非仅为财产利益，更多的是离婚后和平、良好亲子关系的维系以及未成年子女的健康成长等非财产利益，故其赔偿性不仅指向财产损害，也指向精神损害。离婚协议违约金条款虽然存在效力瑕疵的可能性，但违约金过高本身不宜成为无效事由。由此导致的权利义务失衡，可通过司法酌减制度予以矫正。司法酌减的基准是守约方因离婚协议履行所获得的所有正当利益而非违约损失。离婚协议违约金的酌减程度应依动态系统论，在综合考量违约行为对离婚后秩序的破坏程度、当事人的过错程度，以及债务人的认知或经济承受能力等诸项因素的基础上，基于公平和诚信原则予以确定。     

跨境代孕中限制公共秩序保留的路径探析

在跨境代孕中，外国法院判决因与接受国的公共秩序相违背，接受国往往拒绝承认外国法院判决认定的亲子关系，损害了各方利益，尤其是儿童权益。现有公共秩序保留的理论学说有客观结果说、客观联系说、主观说，在解决跨境代孕中公共秩序保留问题时都存在不同程度的局限性，儿童最大利益原则也难以与公共秩序保留制度进行权衡。鉴于此，可从国内与国际两方面探究限制接受国对公共秩序保留适用的路径。在国内，将客观结果说与跨国公共秩序理论相结合，降低公共秩序保留的启动机率；在国际，以《海牙跨国收养公约》为蓝本，为跨境代孕公约的制定提供借鉴与参考。     

司法认定无效行政协议的标准

行政诉讼法明确将行政协议纳入受案范围。行政协议效力以及无效行政协议的认定涉及法院审理行政协议案件的法律适用。公私法规则在关于合同效力的价值取向上存在对极冲突,因此,无论是同时还是单独适用行政诉讼法或者民事法律,均无法搭建逻辑周延的行政协议的效力框架。与此同时,公法和私法在法律原则、法律规范等方面仍然存在相互融通并具备提取效力认定的公因式提供可能性。以违法作为无效的起点,无效行政协议的标准介于单方行政行为无效标准和民事合同无效标准之间。以列举形式在行政主体资格、私方合同当事人资格、协议内容、协议程序方面建构无效行政协议的标准,是解决理论和实践难题的出路。     

亲子关系的推定与否认制度的建构

法律上亲子关系实为立法构建的产物。亲子关系的确定应兼顾血缘真实、身份安定和未成年子女的最佳利益。以法律推定方法确定子女法律上的父亲,既应适用于婚生子女,也应适用于同居关系中的非婚生子女。对于与真实血缘不符的亲子关系的推定,特定当事人应当享有进行否认的权利。因此,法律应对各主体否认权的赋予具有不同的正当性基础,区分各否认权人的否认理由和否认时效,以体现不同的政策考量。同时还应对否认的法律后果做出明确规定。     

儿童利益最大化原则在学前教育立法中的落实

在学前教育立法中落实儿童利益最大化原则,应以明确儿童利益最大化原则的合理内涵为前提条件,以在立法中列举评判儿童最大利益的各项要素为重要内容,以建立程序性机制为重要保障。我国《学前教育法草案》还存在弱化儿童利益最大化原则地位、评估儿童最大利益的考量因素过少、缺乏儿童利益最大化原则的程序性保障等不足。我国应当在学前教育立法中凸显儿童利益最大化原则的法律地位,明确儿童最大利益的评估标准与确定机制,制定落实儿童利益最大化原则的程序性机制。     

婚生否认之诉原告资格的立法完善和规范适用

对于婚生否认之诉的原告,目前我国法采取了明确列举的方式,所规定的原告范围较窄。当其他可能的原告起诉时,法院或严格适用法律规范,或扩大原告范围,产生了矛盾裁判。立法应当对能够成立诉权并启动司法审判的适格原告作出周全选择和判断。基于身份权的专属性及国家意欲保护的权利和价值,亲子关系的主体,即父母、子女均有婚生否认之诉原告资格;生父仅在婚生亲子关系不利于子女最佳利益或损害公共利益时,才附条件地具有婚生否认之诉原告资格;父死亡后的继承人因无专属身份关系以及身份公益优位于财产私益的法理,不具有婚生否认之诉原告资格。在立法作出周全选择后,司法实践应当准确把握婚生否认之诉属于形成之诉的本质及立法的文义和目的,遵循形成之诉原告的法定性和封闭性,不得扩大原告范围。     

论身份关系协议对民法典合同编的参照适用

婚姻、收养、监护等有关身份关系的协议存在"参照适用"民法典合同编的空间。"身份关系协议的性质"是身份法律行为及相应身份权利义务关系所展现出的身份共同体特点,也是"参照适用"时对被引用法条限制或者修正变通的判断标准和解释依归。"身份关系协议的性质"具体包括鼓励缔结婚姻、维护夫妻等身份关系和谐安定、实现夫妻乃至家庭共同利益、养老育幼、未成年子女利益最大化等价值追求。应该区分不同类型的身份关系协议、区分同一类型身份关系协议中不同内容约款、区分身份关系协议的内部效力与外部效力,分别讨论"参照适用"的空间。不能脱离身份关系协议的"整体"来看待忠诚协议、离婚财产分割协议或者夫妻财产约定中的所谓"赠与条款"这个"部分",身份关系协议原则上应该作为一个整体,且形成继续性民事法律关系。     

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。     

家事诉讼与儿童利益保护

儿童利益是一种身份利益,具有显著的公益性,国家与社会必须给予特殊保护。涉及儿童的家事审判要遵循儿童利益最大化、儿童参与以及儿童优先保护等原则。从我国家事审判立法看,涉及儿童利益保护的规定散见于诸多的法律、司法解释以及政策性文件中,这些规定尽管为家事司法提供了基本的依据,但缺憾亦非常明显,表现为没有上位法的原则性规定,没有形成体系完整、结构合理的专门制度,部分立法规范前后矛盾,缺乏科学性和严谨性,缺乏实现儿童利益最大化的具体程序和相关配套机制。为此,有必要在基本法和部门法层面确立儿童利益最大化的法律原则;保障儿童表达意见权利和诉讼参与权;从司法层面看,确认儿童的诉讼主体地位,确立涉儿童家事案件职权探知、职权调查原则,建立专业化的家事审判机构。通过上述多重举措,真正实现家事审判对儿童利益的充分保障。     

Who is the parent in cloning?

In July 1996, a sheep named Dolly was born in Scotland. What makes Dolly's birth noteworthy is that she is the result of the first successful cloning attempt using the nucleus of an adult cell. The technique that led to Dolly's birth involved transferring the nucleus of a mammary cell from an adult sheep to the enucleated egg cell of an unrelated sheep with gestation occurring in a third sheep. The possibility of applying this technique to human reproduction raised concerns worldwide with several countries moving for an immediate bans on human cloning. In the United States, President Clinton requested that the National Bioethics Advisory Commission ("NBAC"), a multidisciplinary group composed of scientists, lawyers, educators, theologians, and ethicists study the implications of cloning and issue recommendations. The Commission consulted other scientists, ethicists, theologians, lawyers, and citizens with interests in this advancing technology and concluded that, "at this time it is morally unacceptable for anyone in the public or private sector, whether in a research or clinical setting, to attempt to create a child using somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning." This Article was included in a larger work prepared at the request of, and submitted to the Commission by, law professor Lori B. Andrews. Cloning through nuclear transfer will change the way we create and define families. This Article explores how existing law relating to parentage, surrogacy, egg donation, and artificial insemination may apply in the cloning context to clarify the parent-child relationship established through cloning.     

Assessing the best interests of the child in cases of cross-border surrogacy: inconsistency in the Strasbourg approach?

This article examines the approach of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to assessing the best interests of the child in three recent cases of cross-border surrogacy, namely Mennesson v France, Labassee v France and Paradiso and Campanelli v Italy. It is argued that these cases reveal inconsistency in the ECtHR’s assessment of the best interests of the child. In Mennesson and Labassee, the ECtHR found that the national authorities’ refusal to legally recognise the relationships between the children and the intended parents amounted to a violation of Article 8 ECHR, whereas no violation was found in Paradiso. A notable distinguishing feature of Paradiso was that there was no genetic relationship between the child and the intended parents, and it is this point that seemingly led the Court to assess the best interests of that child differently to the others.     

An appraisal of Ireland’s current legislative proposals for regulating domestic surrogacy arrangements

This article critiques the complex hybrid model that has been proposed for regulating domestic surrogacy arrangements in Ireland, and the reasons why this model came about. It proposes an alternative model for regulating surrogacy, one that is in operation elsewhere and achieves a better balance between the rights of the surrogate, the intending parents and, most importantly, the surrogate-born child. The proposed establishment of the National Surrogacy Register, its interaction with the Register of Births and the issuing of ‘surrogacy certificates’ is also analysed, and a far less complex means of respecting the surrogate-born child’s right to knowledge of its identity is proposed. The article concludes that Ireland’s current legislative proposals for regulating surrogacy need to be substantially revised before ever being placed on the statute book. In their present form, they are so restrictive that, rather than facilitating domestic surrogacy arrangements, they are far more likely to discourage them.     

论子女最佳利益原则

子女最佳利益原则已发展成为各国家庭法在处理父母离婚后子女监护案件时的最高准则。虽然该原则其概念本身含有不确定性 ,具有多种可以不同明确表达的空间 ,但采用该原则的世界各国仍致力于列出若干决定子女最佳利益的具体准则。本文作者主张我国婚姻法应引进“子女最佳利益”原则作为处理子女监护问题时的最高指导原则 ,摒弃父母权利本位思想     

The rights of donor inseminated children to know their genetic origins in Australia

Twenty years after it was recognised that adopted children have rights to understand their origins, the dawn has finally broken with respect to children conceived as a result of the Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART), specifically donor insemination (DI). Recipients and practitioners of conception technologies focus their energies and ethical deliberation on the achievement of pregnancy and the successful birth of the child. Law, in contrast, must focus beyond birth to enshrine respect for the rights of the child, who is 'not legally capable of defending [his or her] own future interests.' This article undertakes an assessment of what is in the best interests of a child using empirical studies to ground a position that should be adopted by law in Australia. This article also critically evaluates the current legal position of the various States and Territories with regards to a DI conceived child's rights to know of their form of conception; access to identifying information of their donor; at what age they may access information; the position of DI children born before existing legislation; record-keeping; and finally whether international law grants such children rights. Australian children must enjoy the right in theory and practice to know they were donor conceived and the identity of their donor. It is disappointing that New South Wales, as the most recent State to propose legislation on ART, has not utilised international empirical research on the best interests of DI children or even followed the Infertility Treatment Act 1995 (Vic) which seems to be far more progressive in recognising how best to protect the rights of DI children. The current legal position is chaotic. States and Territories should confer power on the Federal Government to legislate uniform and explicit regulation of ART for the benefit of DI children.