:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:人工生殖子女親子法制之檢討與修法建議
書刊名:國立臺灣大學法學論叢
作者:邱玟惠 引用關係
作者(外文):Chiu, Wen-hui
出版日期:2009
卷期:38:3
頁次:頁281-348
主題關鍵詞:人工生殖親子關係胚胎生母恆定婚姻示父婚生子女婚生推定婚生否定血統Assisted reproductionParentageEmbryoMater semper certa estPater est quem nuptiae demonstrantLegitimate childPresumption of legitimacyDisavowal of the legitimacy presumptionSanguinity
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(2) 博士論文(2) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:55
  • 點閱點閱:72
人工生殖技術之發展,以非性交之輔助性生殖方法實現了不孕夫妻的親子期盼,但由於人工生殖可能非法進行或發生技術面之錯誤,卻也創造出各種令人錯愕之親子組合,倘依現行人工生殖法與民法親屬編相關規定論斷其親子關係,恐將得出吾人不易接受的結論。準此,正視現有親子法制之不足而作一整合性檢討與修訂,應有必要。 本文認為人工生殖法第23條至第24條「視為」婚生子女之規定有待斟酌,而「受胎」一詞之用語模稜,對合法捐精者與捐卵者、以及精卵細胞遭誤用者之權益保護並不周全,均宜加以修訂。再者,各種非法人工生殖或技術面錯誤情形由於多不能適用人工生殖法,其親子關係之認定將悉數回歸適用民法親屬編之規定。然而,人工生殖技術割裂了分娩事實與血統真實之一致性,也破壞了生殖細胞產生、受精與胚胎著床在時問上的緊密連接性,連帶地影響了「生母恆定原則」之血統正確性,故本文認為,對現行法之解釋,似可考慮改以「生母推定原則」取代之,雖仍維持依「婚姻示父」原則推定生父,但夫妻之一方或子女,於符合特定要件與期問內,對生母與生父之兩個推定,均容許其依血統真實關係而否認之;再輔以增訂「婚生關係全否認限制」與「生母認領」等相關規定,以確保子女之基本法律地位利益,此外並開放生母認領子女之途徑。 須特別強調的是,雖謂「生母推定」然於真實血統關係下將無異於「生母恆定」,因此,本文雖採「生母推定原則」,惟此對於現今社會中非依人工生殖方式所建立之絕大多數親子關係而言,完全不生影響。此一生母決定原則之變動,可更具彈性地因應人工生殖科技對親屬法制之衝擊,有效補強親子認定規範上之漏洞,除能夠體現司法院釋字第 587 號解釋所揭示兼顧血統真實、身分安定及子女利益之原則之外,並能增進親屬編親子關係法制上的完整性。
The advance in reproductive medicine made it possible for many infertile spouses to have the chance to breed their ”own” children. Nevertheless, the application of assisted reproductive technique hereinto also created discrepancy between sanguinity and parenthood by applying gametes other than the spouses', which therefore overthrew the traditional family concept and challenged the principle of our Civil Code. Consequently as supplement, the Artificial Reproduction Act was promulgated on March 21, 2007 for the purpose maintaining social ethics, and protecting the rights and interests of infertile spouses, children conceived through artificial reproduction, and donors. The nowadays arising real-life cases caused either by negligent fertilization with wrong gamete cells or through illegal procedure have fled far beyond the legislator's then imagination. In abovementioned circumstances, an astonishing and debating conclusion will be drawn about the parenthood if the contemporary Artificial Reproduction Act and Civil Code were applied. The unconsidered inconsistencies in the parenthood exhibited herein will urge us to a critical and integrated review on these regulations. The core doctrine ”Mater semper certa est” i.e., legitimating motherhood by the fact of delivery, served to build up the traditional parenthood in our family laws of Civil Code, has been bitterly challenged by the modern assisted reproductive technique through simply introducing gametes other than the mother-to-be's and thus inventing the discrepancy between the gestation and the sanguinity. In as much as the fact that ”women delivering children” could no longer assure the genuine maternal sanguinity, this article asserts that the children delivered should be ”presumed” to be legitimate not only on paternal side, as already stipulated, but also on maternal side, either of which should be allowed to be disavowed if proved otherwise. In response, this article carefully and deliberately attempts to amend all the relevant provisions in Artificial Reproduction Act and Civil Code regarding the parenthood with special emphasis on the integration in between. Hopefully this endeavor will successfully dodge the troublesome parenthood disputes and controversies regarding the assisted reproductive minority without disturbing the naturally conceived majority, and will keep in complete accord with the constitutional principles as held in J.Y. Interpretations No. 587 to balance the maintenance of a stable family status order and the protection of a child's interests.
期刊論文
1.李立如(20041200)。朝向子女最佳利益的婚生推定制度。中原財經法學,13,109-146。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.林秀雄(20050100)。婚生推定。臺灣本土法學雜誌,66,160-166。  延伸查詢new window
3.王海南(20070800)。人工生殖子女之法律地位--兼評「人工生殖法」中涉及身分關係之相關規定。法令月刊,58(8),102-116。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.李震山(19950600)。從憲法保障生命權及人性尊嚴之觀點論人工生殖。月旦法學,2,18-25。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.陳英鈐(20070800)。人工生殖法的幾個問題。法令月刊,58(8),117-127。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.鄧學仁(20070900)。評親屬法之修正。月旦民商法雜誌,17,5-18。  延伸查詢new window
7.戴東雄(19870100)。孩子, 你的父母是誰?:論人工生殖之子女, 尤其試管嬰兒在法律上之身分。法學叢刊,32(1)=125,13-29。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.吳煜宗(20050400)。子女自我否認婚生性之權利--釋字第五八七號解釋的挑戰。月旦法學,119,213-224。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.吳志正(20090500)。女性主義法學觀點下之人工生殖相關法議題。月旦法學,168,139-154。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.侯英泠(2004)。論人工生殖受術夫妻手術同意書之法律效果。成大法學,2,75-119。  延伸查詢new window
11.侯英泠(2006)。從「子女最佳利益」原則檢視人工生殖法草案。律師雜誌,318,16-29。  延伸查詢new window
12.紀欣(2006)。簡介美國法律對於處理代孕安排的最新發展。律師雜誌,318,41-49。  延伸查詢new window
13.鄧學仁(1999)。DNA之鑑定與親子關係之確定。警大法學論集,4,317-336。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.戴瑀如(2007)。從德國立法例論我國新人工生殖法對親屬法之衝擊。法令月刊,58(8),128-145。  延伸查詢new window
15.簡賢坤(2008)。民法親屬編修正後「婚生否認」制度之探討。月旦法學雜誌,161,49-66。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.蘇淑貞(2006)。談「人工生殖法」。律師雜誌,318,30-35。  延伸查詢new window
17.中村恵(2007)。生殖補助医療における同意の法的意味-最近の判例を素材として。ジュリスト,1339,18-24。  延伸查詢new window
18.我妻堯(2004)。生殖補助医療と親子関係-医学の立場から。ジュリスト,1243,41-49。  延伸查詢new window
19.判例時報社(2007)。判例特報-民法が実親子関係を認めていない者の間にその成立を認める内容の外国裁判所の裁判と民訴法118条3号にいう公の秩序(最二決19.3.23、平18(許)47 号)。判例時報,1967,36-44。  延伸查詢new window
20.岩志和一郎(1989)。AIDによって生まれてきた子の身分関係-日本と西ドイツの比較を通じて。判例タイムズ,709,49-60。  延伸查詢new window
21.棚村政行(2003)。生殖補助医療と親子関係(1)。法学教室,275,65-74。  延伸查詢new window
22.棚村政行(2003)。生殖補助医療と親子関係(2)。法学教室,276,32-38。  延伸查詢new window
23.Steptoe, Patrick C.、Edwards, Robert G.(1978)。Birth after the Reimplantation of a Human Embryo。Lancet,2,366-366。  new window
24.Wehrstedt, Stefan(2005)。Anfechtungsrechte im Falle heterologer Insemination: Anmerkungen zum Urt. des BGH v. 26. 1. 2005--XII ZR 70/03。Deutsche Notarzeitschrift,9,651-655。  new window
圖書
1.吳志正(200609)。解讀醫病關係(II)--醫療責任體系篇。台北:元照出版社。  延伸查詢new window
2.Rüthers, Bernd(2007)。Rechtstheorie: Begriff, Geltung, und Anwendung des Rechts。Rechtstheorie: Begriff, Geltung, und Anwendung des Rechts。München, Germany:Verlag C. H. Beck。  new window
3.星野英一(1994)。家族法。財團法人放送大學教育振興會。  延伸查詢new window
4.東吳大學法學院(2008)。英美法常用名詞解析。台北:新學林。  延伸查詢new window
5.林誠二(1982)。親屬法專題研究。臺北市:林菊枝。  延伸查詢new window
6.戴炎輝、戴東雄(2002)。親屬法。沒有紀錄:國立台灣大學法學院福利社。  延伸查詢new window
7.陳棋炎、黃宗樂、郭振恭(2008)。民法親屬新論。三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
8.林秀雄(1987)。家族法論集,第二冊。家族法論集,第二冊。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
9.林誠二(1998)。民法總則講義,上冊。民法總則講義,上冊。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
10.鄧學仁、嚴祖照、高一書(2006)。DNA鑑定:親子關係爭端之解決。DNA鑑定:親子關係爭端之解決。臺北。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.Andrews, Lori B.、Mehlman, Maxwell J.、Rothstein, Mark A.(2002)。Genetics: Ethics, Law, and Policy。Genetics: Ethics, Law, and Policy。St. Paul, MN。  new window
12.(2007)。Human Fertilization and Embryology: Reproducing Regulation。Human Fertilization and Embryology: Reproducing Regulation。New York, NY。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE