【摘要】：衛(wèi)生部頒布的部門(mén)規(guī)章中關(guān)于胚胎不能買(mǎi)賣(mài)、贈(zèng)送和禁止實(shí)施代孕的規(guī)定,僅針對(duì)從事人工生殖輔助技術(shù)的醫(yī)療機(jī)構(gòu)和人員而言,并未對(duì)一般公民尤其是失獨(dú)公民就其或者其子女遺留下來(lái)的冷凍胚胎行使監(jiān)管、處置權(quán)作出禁止、限制性規(guī)定。醫(yī)療機(jī)構(gòu)缺乏充分依據(jù)基于部門(mén)規(guī)章的行政管理規(guī)定對(duì)抗當(dāng)事人基于私法所享有的正當(dāng)權(quán)利。在現(xiàn)行法律法規(guī)對(duì)人體冷凍胚胎法律屬性沒(méi)有明確規(guī)定的情況下,考慮到司法救濟(jì)的終局屬性,人民法院不能拒絕裁判,應(yīng)當(dāng)承擔(dān)特定的司法責(zé)任。在人體冷凍胚胎監(jiān)管權(quán)、處置權(quán)歸屬的問(wèn)題上,應(yīng)充分考慮胚胎處置權(quán)利的特殊性,結(jié)合倫理、情感、特殊利益保護(hù)等情理交融因素,在不違背禁止性規(guī)定的前提下作出契合法理精神的判決。法院判決本身在性質(zhì)上只是對(duì)于作為客觀物質(zhì)存在的胚胎之權(quán)屬糾紛進(jìn)行確權(quán),而確權(quán)之后非法代孕的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)已經(jīng)超出法院裁判的應(yīng)有范疇。
[Abstract]:The regulations issued by the Ministry of Health concerning that embryos cannot be sold, given away and prohibited from performing surrogate pregnancy are only for medical institutions and personnel engaged in assisted technology for artificial reproduction. There is no prohibition or restriction on the exercise of supervision and disposal of frozen embryos left over by ordinary citizens, especially citizens without independence, or their children. Medical institutions do not fully rely on departmental regulations to counter the parties' legitimate rights under private law. Under the condition that the legal attribute of human frozen embryo is not clearly stipulated by the current laws and regulations, the people's court cannot refuse the judgment and should bear the specific judicial responsibility, considering the final attribute of judicial relief. On the issue of the right to supervise and dispose of frozen embryos, we should fully consider the particularity of the right to dispose of embryos, and combine the factors of ethics, emotion, protection of special interests and so on. To make a judgment in accordance with the spirit of law on the premise of not violating the prohibitive provisions. The court judgment itself is only the right to confirm the dispute over the ownership of embryos as an objective substance, and the risk of illegal surrogacy after the confirmation of power has exceeded the scope of the court decision.
【作者單位】： 江蘇省無(wú)錫市中級(jí)人民法院;
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D920.5;D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 宋旺興;;論民事案由確定制度的完善[J];法律適用;2012年02期

2 吳兆祥;;確定民事案件案由應(yīng)注意的幾個(gè)問(wèn)題[J];中國(guó)審判;2008年04期

3 楊立新;陶盈;;人體變異物的性質(zhì)及其物權(quán)規(guī)則[J];學(xué)海;2013年01期

【共引文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 侯猛;;最高法院司法知識(shí)體制再生產(chǎn)——以最高法院規(guī)制經(jīng)濟(jì)的司法過(guò)程為例[J];北大法律評(píng)論;2004年00期

2 徐國(guó)棟;;權(quán)利能力制度的理想與現(xiàn)實(shí)——人法的英特納雄耐爾之路[J];北方法學(xué);2007年02期

3 張志超;;英租時(shí)期威海衛(wèi)的民事糾紛與民事訴訟[J];北方法學(xué);2008年06期

4 張小平;;法律經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的普通法語(yǔ)境及其在大陸法系背景下的應(yīng)用前景[J];北方法學(xué);2010年06期

5 李國(guó)強(qiáng);;時(shí)代變遷與物權(quán)客體的重新界定[J];北京師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年01期

6 張杰;戚t，

本文編號(hào)：2189891