跨国代孕中法定父母身份的承认问题研究
本文选题:跨国代孕 + 出生证明 ; 参考:《山东科技大学》2017年硕士论文
【摘要】:世界各国对代孕的不同态度导致了跨国代孕现象的产生。随着全球化及医学技术的发展,跨国代孕现象呈现逐步扩大的趋势,跨国代孕儿童法定父母身份不明等问题也逐渐引起了社会的广泛关注。鉴于国际社会对跨国代孕尚无统一定义,仅海牙国际私法会议在研究报告中对国际代孕协议进行了简单定义,为了尽可能涵盖跨国代孕的各种情形,在借鉴海牙国际私法会议对国际代孕协议的定义的同时,应采用惯常居所并增加代孕行为实施地作为判断跨国因素的标准。跨国代孕法定父母身份的承认事实上是出生地国作出的确定跨国代孕儿童法定父母身份的证明文件的承认。由于各接收国对出生证明的性质的认识并不完全一致,且接收国没有专门规范出生证明的承认的法律,因此,在实践中接收国对出生证明的承认分为两种:一种是承认出生证明的证据效力,另一种是承认出生证明的法律效力。相较而言,各接收国对出生地国的法院判决的认识比较一致,且接收国有专门规范法院判决的承认的法律,国际上也有规范法院判决承认的国际条约,因此,在实践中接收国对法院判决的承认有明确的法律依据和应遵循的条件。由于接收国与出生地国在对待代孕的态度上存在显著差异,接收国为了维护其法律秩序,经常援用公共秩序拒绝承认出生地国确定的法定父母身份,致使跨国代孕儿童成为无父无母的孤儿,甚至成为无国籍人。从公共秩序适用的法律理论角度、保护儿童利益的国际法义务角度分析可知,接收国援用公共秩序拒绝承认的行为是不合理的。鉴于跨国代孕问题的复杂性及解决跨国代孕法定父母身份承认问题的现实紧迫性,为了保护跨国代孕儿童的利益,保护意向父母与孕母的合法权益,接收国应该将儿童最佳利益作为法定父母身份承认的首要考虑因素,同时严格限制公共秩序的适用,而海牙国际私法会议也应适时制定相应的国际法律文件,从国际层面规范跨国代孕法定父母身份的承认。
[Abstract]:Different attitudes towards surrogacy in the world lead to the phenomenon of transnational surrogacy. With the development of globalization and medical technology, the phenomenon of transnational surrogacy is gradually expanding. In view of the fact that the international community does not have a uniform definition of transnational surrogacy, only the Hague Conference on Private International Law has, in its study, provided a simple definition of international surrogacy agreements in order to cover, as far as possible, the full range of cases of transnational surrogacy, While drawing lessons from the Hague Conference on Private International Law's definition of international surrogacy agreement, we should adopt habitual residence and increase the place of surrogacy as the criterion to judge transnational factors. The recognition of the legal parental status of transnational surrogate pregnancy is in fact the recognition of the legal parental identity of the transnational surrogate child made by the country of birth. As the nature of birth certificates is not fully understood in the receiving countries and there is no law specifically regulating the recognition of birth certificates in the receiving countries, In practice, there are two kinds of recognition of birth certificate in receiving country: one is to recognize the evidentiary effect of birth certificate, the other is to recognize the legal effect of birth certificate. In contrast, the receiving States have a consistent understanding of court decisions in the country of origin, and the receiving State has laws specifically regulating the recognition of court decisions, and there are international treaties regulating the recognition of court decisions, and therefore, In practice, the receiving country has a clear legal basis for the recognition of the court decision and the conditions to be followed. As there are significant differences in attitudes towards surrogacy between the receiving State and the country of birth, in order to maintain their legal order, the receiving State often invokes public order in refusing to recognize the legal parental status established by the State of birth. Transnational surrogate children become orphaned and even stateless. From the point of view of the applicable legal theory of public order and the obligation of international law to protect the interests of children, it can be concluded that it is unreasonable for the receiving country to invoke the act of refusing to recognize the public order. In view of the complexity of the issue of transnational surrogacy and the practical urgency of resolving the problem of legal parental recognition of transnational surrogacy, in order to protect the interests of transnational surrogate children, and to protect the legitimate rights and interests of intending parents and pregnant mothers, The receiving State should make the best interests of the child the primary consideration in recognition of legal parental status, while strictly limiting the application of public order, and the Hague Conference on Private International Law should, in due course, develop appropriate international legal documents, To regulate the recognition of legal parental status of transnational surrogate pregnancy from the international level.
【学位授予单位】:山东科技大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2017
【分类号】:D998
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 游文亭;;跨国代孕法律规制探究——从国际法律冲突角度分析[J];山西师大学报(社会科学版);2016年03期
2 刘长秋;;权利视野下的代孕及其立法规制研究[J];河南大学学报(社会科学版);2015年04期
3 杜涛;;国际私法国际前沿年度报告(2013-2014)[J];国际法研究;2015年01期
4 任巍;;论完全代孕中子女身份归属的法律认定——从“子女最佳利益”原则出发[J];学术探索;2014年08期
5 王萍;;代孕法律的比较考察与技术分析[J];法治研究;2014年06期
6 任巍;王倩;;我国代孕的合法化及其边界研究[J];河北法学;2014年02期
7 任际;;国际私法中公共秩序保留的综合要素及适用趋势[J];武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2013年06期
8 李志强;;代孕生育亲子关系认定问题探析[J];北方民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2011年04期
9 马永梅;;外国法院判决承认与执行中的公共秩序[J];政法论坛;2010年05期
10 刘长秋;;刑法视野下的器官移植[J];现代法学;2008年06期
相关重要报纸文章 前1条
1 杜涛;;跨国代孕引发国际私法问题[N];中国妇女报;2016年
相关博士学位论文 前1条
1 康茜;代孕关系的法律调整问题研究[D];西南政法大学;2011年
相关硕士学位论文 前4条
1 顾菲;跨国代孕的国际私法问题研究[D];东南大学;2016年
2 齐玲星;跨国代孕亲子关系确定问题研究[D];浙江工商大学;2015年
3 王琴;代孕亲子关系认定研究[D];扬州大学;2014年
4 雷炎;国际私法上的公共秩序保留制度研究[D];中国政法大学;2011年
,本文编号:1849172
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/guojifa/1849172.html