在我国建构ADR机制的必要性及相关设想

ADR(诉讼外纠纷解决机制)是目前世界各国普遍采用的解决民事纠纷的有效手段。作者在分析了我国建构ADR机制现实必要性的前提下,提出了建构我国ADR机制的相关设想。     

行政过程中的民事纠纷解决机制研究

为推介中国人民大学法学院博士培养成果,搭建论文品评乃至学术评价之平台,《法学家》专辟"博文精萃"一栏。该栏目由两部分组成:其一是"论文要旨",由博文作者对其博文进行全面系统而重点突出的介绍,一般宜包括如下要素:博文的体系架构;博文每章节的主要内容;博文的主要特点;博文的主要创新和不足;博文所研究领域的课题展望。其二是"论文评议",可以是答辩委员会的论文审查意见,或者评审专家的点评,具体宜包括如下要素:对论文的总体评价;对论文的体系及各章节的评价;对论文创新的评价;指出论文的不足以及进一步完善的方向。敬请关注并提出宝贵建议。     

现代化视野中的法院功能

现代化不仅是一种分析问题的框架,也是一种发源于西方并逐渐扩展至全球的运动。在此宏大背景下,作为子系统的法院制度改革关键就是如何对法院功能正确定位。对法院的形式功能(纠纷解决)过多的强化,会弱化法院实现规则之治的实质功能。法院的权力制约功能和人权保障功能应得到应有的重视。通过对政府权力进行理性的限制,对人权加以妥帖的维护,逐渐获得人民对司法权的信任和依赖,实现对社会关系的良好调整。     

索马里海盗的界定及惩治

海军护航打击索马里海盗有充分的国际法依据。《联合国海洋法公约》关于海盗行为的定义一定程度上限制了对索马里海盗的打击。短时间内,修订《联合国海洋法公约》关于海盗的定义并不现实,联合国安理会的决议又具有临时性,通过双边或区域协议的方式对海盗的认定达成共识是一种可行的方法。由某一主权国家审判索马里海盗存在一定的困难性,国际社会可采取特设法庭的方式来审判索马里海盗。我国应制定惩治海盗的国内法。     

论医疗纠纷ADR机制之构建

文章参照美、德、日三个发达国家的非诉讼解决纠纷制度,采用比较的方法,在借鉴其他国家经验的基础上,剖析了我国医疗纠纷非诉讼解决机制存在的问题。对完善医疗纠纷协商机制、引入第三方介入医疗纠纷的调解机制及加快我国医事立法方面提出了建议,以此构建和谐医患关系。     

Duel or Dual: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Parenting Coordination for Uber‐Conflicted Parenting Relationships

Parenting coordination for families struggling with severe conflict can be challenging for both the family and the parenting coordinator (PC). These families can put an inordinate strain on the PC as they lobby their positions and try to bias the PC against the other parent. The interdisciplinary dual‐PC model is an innovative approach using aspects of the collaborative practice model to enhance the efficacy of the process while utilizing the strengths of both disciplines. Through a case illustration, the identification of the family dynamics and situations that give rise to use of this approach shall become clear. This article also demonstrates the potential benefits to both the family and the PCs. All aspects synthesize into a cohesive, well‐balanced approach to the uber‐conflicted parenting relationships.     

Evaluation of the University of Denver's Center for Separating and Divorcing Families: The First Out‐of‐Court Divorce Option1

The Resource Center for Separating and Divorcing Families (RCSDF) is the first U.S. alternative dispute resolution model to provide legal dispute resolution, therapeutic, educational, and financial services to separating and divorcing families in a single location outside the courthouse. Data were collected on 82 families at entry and service completion: service utilization, process timeliness, family satisfaction, and outcomes. Parents were highly satisfied with the process and demonstrated significant improvements in personal well‐being, co‐parenting, parenting quality, and reported reductions in children's anxiety/depression. Community partners felt RCSDF was a positive innovation in their community. The RCSDF model represents a culture shift from an adversarial process to a cohesive alternative that supports the well‐being of all family members.     

Critical Review of Research Evidence of Parenting Coordination's Effectiveness

Parenting coordination (PC) has been in use since the mid‐1980s, but research on its effectiveness is sorely lacking. We review the extant research organized by three themes: (1) parenting coordinators’ perceptions of their role and function; (2) professionals’ and parents’ views and perceptions of PC; and (3) outcomes of PC, including some measures of effectiveness of the PC process. While these studies provide some insight into PC effectiveness, there is still a lack of research that uses objective outcome measures of efficacy and that considers characteristics of the co‐parent dyad, personality difficulties, or the professional discipline of the parenting coordinator. Future research recommendations are discussed.     

A Paradigm Shift in the Practice of Family Law: A Response to Mosten and Traum

In their article, Interdisciplinary Teamwork in Family Law Practice, Mosten and Traum promote the use of an interdisciplinary, team‐based approach to family law practice. This commentary focuses on the two pronged shift in the current zeitgeist of family law practice. First, Mosten and Traum guide us away from an historically adversarial approach to family law practice, in which attorneys advocate for the legal rights of a single client, to a more holistic approach in which the focus is on the Family Global Case. Furthermore, the push toward Family Global Case shifts the focus away from discrete legal issues associated with reorganization to empowering families to self‐determine through their reorganization. This shift follows the movement in both medicine and mental health away from direct intervention for people with disorders to promoting wellness for at‐risk yet healthy individuals. The second prong of Mosten and Traum's approach is a movement toward more collaborative interdisciplinary functioning. However, the shift in the practice of family law from the sole practitioner working alone to being one member of a broader multidisciplinary team focusing on the future well‐being of the family brings with it not only issues of professional role definitions but also the development of a new combined set of ethics and models for training. These are discussed in detail.