發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-05 20:24

  本文選題：跨國代孕 + 出生證明��； 參考：《山東科技大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：世界各國對代孕的不同態(tài)度導(dǎo)致了跨國代孕現(xiàn)象的產(chǎn)生。隨著全球化及醫(yī)學(xué)技術(shù)的發(fā)展,跨國代孕現(xiàn)象呈現(xiàn)逐步擴(kuò)大的趨勢,跨國代孕兒童法定父母身份不明等問題也逐漸引起了社會的廣泛關(guān)注。鑒于國際社會對跨國代孕尚無統(tǒng)一定義,僅海牙國際私法會議在研究報(bào)告中對國際代孕協(xié)議進(jìn)行了簡單定義,為了盡可能涵蓋跨國代孕的各種情形,在借鑒海牙國際私法會議對國際代孕協(xié)議的定義的同時(shí),應(yīng)采用慣常居所并增加代孕行為實(shí)施地作為判斷跨國因素的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)�？鐕蟹ǘǜ改干矸莸某姓J(rèn)事實(shí)上是出生地國作出的確定跨國代孕兒童法定父母身份的證明文件的承認(rèn)。由于各接收國對出生證明的性質(zhì)的認(rèn)識并不完全一致,且接收國沒有專門規(guī)范出生證明的承認(rèn)的法律,因此,在實(shí)踐中接收國對出生證明的承認(rèn)分為兩種:一種是承認(rèn)出生證明的證據(jù)效力,另一種是承認(rèn)出生證明的法律效力。相較而言,各接收國對出生地國的法院判決的認(rèn)識比較一致,且接收國有專門規(guī)范法院判決的承認(rèn)的法律,國際上也有規(guī)范法院判決承認(rèn)的國際條約,因此,在實(shí)踐中接收國對法院判決的承認(rèn)有明確的法律依據(jù)和應(yīng)遵循的條件。由于接收國與出生地國在對待代孕的態(tài)度上存在顯著差異,接收國為了維護(hù)其法律秩序,經(jīng)常援用公共秩序拒絕承認(rèn)出生地國確定的法定父母身份,致使跨國代孕兒童成為無父無母的孤兒,甚至成為無國籍人。從公共秩序適用的法律理論角度、保護(hù)兒童利益的國際法義務(wù)角度分析可知,接收國援用公共秩序拒絕承認(rèn)的行為是不合理的。鑒于跨國代孕問題的復(fù)雜性及解決跨國代孕法定父母身份承認(rèn)問題的現(xiàn)實(shí)緊迫性,為了保護(hù)跨國代孕兒童的利益,保護(hù)意向父母與孕母的合法權(quán)益,接收國應(yīng)該將兒童最佳利益作為法定父母身份承認(rèn)的首要考慮因素,同時(shí)嚴(yán)格限制公共秩序的適用,而海牙國際私法會議也應(yīng)適時(shí)制定相應(yīng)的國際法律文件,從國際層面規(guī)范跨國代孕法定父母身份的承認(rèn)。
[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.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D998

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 游文亭;;跨國代孕法律規(guī)制探究——從國際法律沖突角度分析[J];山西師大學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2016年03期

2 劉長秋;;權(quán)利視野下的代孕及其立法規(guī)制研究[J];河南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2015年04期

3 杜濤;;國際私法國際前沿年度報(bào)告(2013-2014)[J];國際法研究;2015年01期

4 任巍;;論完全代孕中子女身份歸屬的法律認(rèn)定——從“子女最佳利益”原則出發(fā)[J];學(xué)術(shù)探索;2014年08期

5 王萍;;代孕法律的比較考察與技術(shù)分析[J];法治研究;2014年06期

6 任巍;王倩;;我國代孕的合法化及其邊界研究[J];河北法學(xué);2014年02期

7 任際;;國際私法中公共秩序保留的綜合要素及適用趨勢[J];武漢大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2013年06期

8 李志強(qiáng);;代孕生育親子關(guān)系認(rèn)定問題探析[J];北方民族大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2011年04期

9 馬永梅;;外國法院判決承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行中的公共秩序[J];政法論壇;2010年05期

10 劉長秋;;刑法視野下的器官移植[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2008年06期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 杜濤;;跨國代孕引發(fā)國際私法問題[N];中國婦女報(bào);2016年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 康茜;代孕關(guān)系的法律調(diào)整問題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2011年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 顧菲;跨國代孕的國際私法問題研究[D];東南大學(xué);2016年

2 齊玲星;跨國代孕親子關(guān)系確定問題研究[D];浙江工商大學(xué);2015年

3 王琴;代孕親子關(guān)系認(rèn)定研究[D];揚(yáng)州大學(xué);2014年

4 雷炎;國際私法上的公共秩序保留制度研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號：1849172