期刊文献+

在儿童最大利益原则和父母人权保护间寻找平衡——以《欧洲人权公约》第8条为考察中心 被引量:4

Striking a Balance between the Best Welfare Principle of Children and the Protection of Parental Human Rights——Focusing on Article 8 of ECHR
下载PDF
导出
摘要 《欧洲人权公约》的生效为重新思考儿童最大利益原则的法律地位提供了契机。由于儿童最大利益原则采用了实用主义路径,而欧洲人权公约采用了权利中心路径,二者之间的冲突不可避免。实用主义路径所对应的权利位阶冲突解决方式并不能产生令人满意的结果。权利中心路径所对应的利益平衡方式已为欧洲人权法院所普遍采纳。关系中心理论试图改变以个体为中心的理论架构,创设全新的冲突解决路径。以促进包含儿童在内的家庭成员的关系为目标的冲突解决方式无疑是未来法律改革的重要方向。 The ratification of European Convention on Human Rights( ECHR) provides an opportunity to rethink the status of best welfare principle of Children. The best welfare principle implies the utilitarian approach while the ECHR is formulated on the right-based approach,hence the unavoidable conflict between them. The right hierarchy rule,which corresponds to the utilitarian approach,does not lead to satisfactory and convincing results.The balancing interests method,corresponding to the right-based approach,is adopted by the European Court of Human Rights. The relationship-centered approach attempts to change the traditional analytical system which is based on individuals,and to create a new method to eliminate the conflicts. A method of prompting the family relationship,including the relationship with the children,represents the orientation of future legal reform.
作者 刘征峰
出处 《广州大学学报(社会科学版)》 CSSCI 2015年第7期17-24,共8页 Journal of Guangzhou University:Social Science Edition
基金 国家人权教育与培训基地项目(教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地项目)(14JJD820017)
关键词 儿童最大利益 父母人权 利益平衡 欧洲人权公约 比例原则 权利路径 实用主义 关系理论 the best interests of children parental human rights interests balance ECHR proportionality principle right-based approach
  • 相关文献

参考文献12

  • 1LOWE N , DOUGLAS. Bromley' s Family Law[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2007 :450. 被引量:1
  • 2MNOOKIN R. Child Custody Adjudication[J]. Law andContemporary Problems, 1975, 3 9:226. 被引量:1
  • 3DIDUCK, KAGANASF. Family Law, Gender and theState: Text, Cases F Materials [M]. Oxford: Hart Publisliing,2000:8 -9. 被引量:1
  • 4HARRIS-SHORT S , MILESJ. Family Law:Text, Cases,and Material7[M] . Oxford: Oxford Univer7ity Pre77,2007:610. 被引量:1
  • 5PARKERS. Rights and Utility in Anglo-Vustralian FamilyLaw[J]. Modem LawReview, 1992, 55 :311. 被引量:1
  • 6HERRINGJ. The Human Rights Act and the WelfarePrinciple in Family Law: Conflicting or Complementary?[J]. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 1999, 11 :231. 被引量:1
  • 7康德.道德形而上学[M]//康德著作全集.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007. 被引量:8
  • 8FORTINJ. TheH R A i s Impact on Litigation InvolvingChildren and Their Families [J]. Child and Family LawQuarterly, 1999, 1 1:237. 被引量:1
  • 9CHOUDHRY S , HERRING. European Human Rightsand Family Law [M] . Oxford: HartPublishing Ltd,2010:108. 被引量:1
  • 10HARRIS-SHORT S. Family Law and the Human RightsAct 1998 : Restraint or Revolution- [J]. Child and FamilyLaw Quarterly, 2005 , 17 :354. 被引量:1

共引文献11

同被引文献43

二级引证文献30

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部