本文選題：親屬身份權(quán) + 歷史沿革��； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：近些年來，隨著社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的飛速發(fā)展，單純的強(qiáng)調(diào)契約自由已經(jīng)不能滿足人們的需要。契約自由是形式上的正義，它提出的前提即忽略了人們之間存在的身份關(guān)系差別，默認(rèn)為人與人之間都是平等的，而實(shí)際上這并不能滿足實(shí)質(zhì)正義的需要。在實(shí)際生活中，人們需要借以“身份關(guān)系”的調(diào)整，來平衡契約自由中存在的弊端，因此對(duì)于身份關(guān)系的研究越來越受到法學(xué)界的關(guān)注和重視。在身份關(guān)系中，親屬身份關(guān)系是其最基本和最重要的內(nèi)容。眾所周知，無論古今中外，親屬身份關(guān)系是每個(gè)人都能夠享有的與生俱來的權(quán)利。它是隨著人的出生自然享有的，而不是后天被賦予的。它是人在社會(huì)上賴以生存的基礎(chǔ)和前提，任何人離開親屬關(guān)系，都是無法成長(zhǎng)起來的。因此，，親屬身份權(quán)一直以來都具有不可估量的重要地位。而遺憾的是，關(guān)于親屬身份權(quán)的研究并沒有引起學(xué)界的足夠重視。目前對(duì)于親屬身份權(quán)的研究很少，以至于至今我國(guó)也沒有形成完整的親屬身份權(quán)理論體系和專門的親屬身份關(guān)系法律制度。這對(duì)于親屬身份關(guān)系的法律保護(hù)是十分不利的，對(duì)于解決司法領(lǐng)域存在的諸多糾紛，也突顯出因理論匱乏導(dǎo)致的顯失公平的尷尬困境。因此，對(duì)于親屬身份權(quán)的研究是迫切需要解決的問題。 本文通過比較分析方法、歷史分析方法和價(jià)值分析方法等論證方法，對(duì)這個(gè)問題進(jìn)行論證。以期能夠?yàn)槲磥碛H屬身份權(quán)法的立法工作提供理論支持，為實(shí)現(xiàn)個(gè)人權(quán)利、維護(hù)親屬間權(quán)益、保障家庭利益和促進(jìn)社會(huì)和諧發(fā)展起到積極的促進(jìn)作用。本文分為四大部分： 第一部分通過對(duì)親屬身份權(quán)的性質(zhì)、特征等方面對(duì)其概念進(jìn)行論證分析，確定了親屬身份權(quán)究竟為何的基本理論前提。第二部分通過對(duì)從古至今、國(guó)內(nèi)及國(guó)外親屬身份權(quán)發(fā)展的歷史沿革的梳理，探究親屬身份權(quán)的歷史理論淵源和本質(zhì)變化，明確了現(xiàn)今親屬身份權(quán)既不是歷史上對(duì)家族的特權(quán)、絕對(duì)的支配權(quán)、局限于具體人格權(quán)的親屬身份權(quán)，也不是中國(guó)封建社會(huì)中的族權(quán)、父權(quán)、夫權(quán)。親屬身份權(quán)是基于親屬的身份關(guān)系事實(shí)，而享有的平等、自由的權(quán)利與義務(wù)。第三部分論證親屬身份權(quán)法律保護(hù)的現(xiàn)狀，探究現(xiàn)有法律制度對(duì)親屬身份權(quán)如何進(jìn)行保護(hù)。明確了當(dāng)代親屬身份關(guān)系間的很多權(quán)利與義務(wù)，在憲法和各個(gè)法律部門都予以了相應(yīng)的規(guī)定，民法、刑法和行政法也對(duì)其進(jìn)行了不同方式的保護(hù)。第四部分對(duì)當(dāng)代中國(guó)親屬身份權(quán)立法與保護(hù)實(shí)踐進(jìn)行反思和重塑，分析我國(guó)親屬身份權(quán)立法與保護(hù)存在的缺陷和不足，并對(duì)其提出解決路徑。筆者認(rèn)為，應(yīng)在遵從親屬身份利益最大化原則及維護(hù)和促進(jìn)家庭和諧原則基礎(chǔ)上，尊重傳統(tǒng)習(xí)俗和道德觀念，在立法思路上創(chuàng)新，同時(shí)借鑒國(guó)外成熟立法經(jīng)驗(yàn)，學(xué)習(xí)其先進(jìn)立法技術(shù)，采取科學(xué)的立法模式和體系，完整詳細(xì)地制定我國(guó)的親屬身份權(quán)法。
[Abstract]:In recent years, with the rapid development of social economy, the emphasis on freedom of contract has been unable to meet the needs of people. Freedom of contract is formal justice, which puts forward the premise of neglecting the difference of identity relationship between people, and acquiescing that all people are equal, but in fact, this can not meet the needs of substantive justice. In real life, people need to adjust the "identity relationship" to balance the disadvantages in the freedom of contract. Therefore, the study of the identity relationship has been paid more and more attention to by the legal circles. In the identity relationship, the relative identity relationship is its most basic and the most important content. As we all know, kinship is the birthright of every human being. It is natural with the birth of human beings, not given the day after. It is the foundation and premise of human survival in society, and no one can grow up without kinship. Therefore, the right to the status of relatives has always had an immeasurable importance. Unfortunately, the research on the right of relative identity has not attracted enough attention. At present, there is little research on the right of kinship identity, so far our country has not formed a complete theoretical system of the right to the identity of relatives and a special legal system of the relationship between relatives. This is very disadvantageous to the legal protection of the relationship of relative identity, and it also highlights the embarrassing predicament of the obvious inequity caused by the lack of theory to solve many disputes in the judicial field. Therefore, the research on the right of relative identity is an urgent problem to be solved. This paper demonstrates this problem by comparative analysis method, historical analysis method and value analysis method. In order to provide theoretical support for the future legislation of the right of relative identity law, to realize individual rights, to safeguard the rights and interests of relatives, to protect the interests of families and to promote the harmonious development of society. This paper is divided into four parts: In the first part, the author proves and analyzes the concept of the right of relative identity in terms of its nature and characteristics, and determines the basic theoretical premise of the right of relative identity. The second part, by combing the history of the development of the right of relative identity in China and abroad from ancient times to the present, explores the historical theoretical origin and essential changes of the right to the identity of relatives, and makes it clear that the right to the status of relatives is not a privilege to the family in history. The absolute power of domination is limited to the right of relative identity of the specific personality right, and is not the clan right, paternal right, and husband right in the feudal society of China. The right of kinship's identity is based on the fact of the relative's identity relationship, and the equal, free right and duty. The third part demonstrates the current situation of legal protection of the right of relative identity, and probes into how the existing legal system protects the right of relative identity. It clarifies many rights and obligations between the status relations of contemporary relatives, which are stipulated in the Constitution and various legal departments, and protected in different ways by civil law, criminal law and administrative law. In the fourth part, the author rethinks and reconstructs the legislation and protection practice of the right of relative identity in contemporary China, analyzes the defects and shortcomings of the legislation and protection of the right of relative identity in China, and puts forward the way to solve it. The author believes that, on the basis of following the principle of maximizing the benefits of relatives' identity and maintaining and promoting family harmony, we should respect traditional customs and moral concepts, innovate in legislative thinking, and learn from the mature legislative experience of foreign countries at the same time. Learn its advanced legislation technology, adopt the scientific legislative model and system, complete and elaborate the law of the right of relative identity in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊立新;;完善我國(guó)親屬法律制度涉及的六個(gè)基本問題[J];重慶社會(huì)科學(xué);2008年06期

2 楊立新;袁雪石;;論身份權(quán)請(qǐng)求權(quán)[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年02期

3 蔣賽靜;;從契約到身份——論現(xiàn)代民法中身份的復(fù)歸[J];河北工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年02期

4 郭鳴;;論親屬身份權(quán)的侵權(quán)法保護(hù)[J];江西社會(huì)科學(xué);2010年03期

5 李擁軍;;“親屬相奸”何以為罪?——對(duì)亂倫罪回歸中國(guó)刑法的深層思考[J];蘭州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2012年06期

6 雷春紅;;中國(guó)未來民法典親屬法編兩議[J];社科縱橫;2006年02期

7 張?chǎng)?從契約到身份——現(xiàn)代身份權(quán)體系的重構(gòu)[J];陜西省行政學(xué)院.陜西省經(jīng)濟(jì)管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年03期

8 劉穎;從身份到契約與從契約到身份——中國(guó)社會(huì)進(jìn)步的一種模式探討[J];天津社會(huì)科學(xué);2005年04期

9 余煜剛;;“從契約到身份”命題的法理解讀[J];中山大學(xué)法律評(píng)論;2012年01期

10 李擁軍;;“孝”的法治難題及其理論破解[J];學(xué)習(xí)與探索;2013年10期

本文編號(hào)：1795705