本文選題：胎兒利益 + 民事權(quán)利能力��； 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：胎兒作為人的完整生命的一個(gè)階段,現(xiàn)在逐漸受到社會(huì)各界的廣泛關(guān)注,而針對現(xiàn)在胎兒利益受到侵犯的案例逐漸增多、類型逐漸復(fù)雜,但我國法律中又沒有關(guān)于胎兒利益保護(hù)的一般規(guī)定,我國法學(xué)者們逐漸將胎兒利益的保護(hù)立法提上日程,現(xiàn)階段我國對于民法典總則的編纂中也已將胎兒利益的保護(hù)納入其中,但是其仍有不足之處,因此,對于胎兒利益保護(hù)的立法完善在現(xiàn)階段顯得尤為迫切。本文運(yùn)用比較分析法、歷史研究法等分析方法,通過對各國關(guān)于胎兒利益的保護(hù)規(guī)定以及我國目前的相關(guān)規(guī)定和現(xiàn)狀分析,以此來找到可行性的保護(hù)胎兒利益的措施,通過借鑒此方面的相關(guān)理論,來逐漸完善我國的立法。本文共包括五個(gè)部分:第一部分介紹了我國的五部民法典草案建議稿及民法總則草案關(guān)于胎兒利益的規(guī)定,通過對這六種不同規(guī)定的分析,總結(jié)了我國學(xué)者們對于此問題的爭議點(diǎn)以及各種觀點(diǎn)的不足之處。說明了當(dāng)前我國對于胎兒利益的日益重視,但是為了實(shí)現(xiàn)胎兒利益的最佳實(shí)現(xiàn),我們需要更加健全、合理的保護(hù)胎兒利益的法律規(guī)范。第二部分介紹了各國（地區(qū)）不同的立法模式,通過對總括保護(hù)主義、個(gè)別保護(hù)主義及絕對主義三種不同立法模式的詳細(xì)描述,并對其進(jìn)行比較分析,通過詳細(xì)的論述,得出總括保護(hù)主義是保護(hù)胎兒利益的最佳立法模式,我國也應(yīng)該采取此種體例,摒棄之前的絕對主義模式。第三部分主要分析胎兒是否應(yīng)被賦予民事權(quán)利能力的問題。通過生物學(xué)基礎(chǔ)、法理學(xué)基礎(chǔ)及價(jià)值基礎(chǔ)三種理論基礎(chǔ)論證了應(yīng)該賦予胎兒民事權(quán)利能力,并通過對法定停止條件說及法定解除條件說這兩種學(xué)說的比較分析說明了胎兒具有權(quán)利能力的前提下其權(quán)利可以由其代理人代為行使,還論證了對于胎兒的民法保護(hù)必須以其活著出生為前提。第四部分通過列舉介紹胎兒受到侵害的主要類型以及與自然人的現(xiàn)實(shí)差異來確定胎兒應(yīng)受保護(hù)的利益范圍:包括物質(zhì)性人格利益、精神性人格利益及財(cái)產(chǎn)利益。第五部分通過對五部民法典草案建議稿及民法總則草案的評析,以及總結(jié)分析以上各種理論的優(yōu)劣勢,得出民法典制定過程中對胎兒利益保護(hù)的立法建議,即可以規(guī)定為:"凡涉及胎兒利益保護(hù)的,胎兒視為具有民事權(quán)利能力。但是,胎兒出生時(shí)未存活的,其民事權(quán)利能力自始不存在。"
[Abstract]:As a stage of human life, foetus has gradually been widely concerned by all walks of life, while the cases of infringing foetus interests are gradually increasing and the types are becoming more and more complicated. However, there are no general provisions on the protection of fetal interests in Chinese law. Chinese legal scholars have gradually put the legislation on the protection of fetal interests on the agenda. At this stage, the protection of fetal interests has also been included in the compilation of the general principles of the Civil Code in our country. However, there are still some shortcomings, so it is urgent to perfect the legislation of fetal interest protection. This paper uses comparative analysis, historical research and other analytical methods to find feasible measures to protect the interests of the fetus by analyzing the relevant regulations of various countries and the relevant regulations and current situation of our country, in order to find out the feasible measures to protect the interests of the fetus. By drawing lessons from the relevant theories in this respect, to gradually improve our legislation. This paper consists of five parts: the first part introduces the five drafts of the civil code and the draft of the civil law on fetal interests, through the analysis of the six different provisions. This paper summarizes the controversial points of Chinese scholars on this issue and the shortcomings of various viewpoints. It shows that our country pays more and more attention to the fetal interests, but in order to realize the best realization of the fetal interests, we need more perfect and reasonable legal norms to protect the fetal interests. The second part introduces the different legislative models of different countries (regions), through the detailed description of three different legislative models of umbrella protectionism, individual protectionism and absolutism, and carries on the comparative analysis to them, through the detailed discussion, It is concluded that umbrella protectionism is the best legislative model to protect the foetus' interests, and our country should also adopt this method and abandon the previous absolutism model. The third part mainly analyzes whether the fetus should be endowed with civil rights. Through the three theoretical bases of biology, jurisprudence and value, it is proved that foetus should be endowed with civil rights. And through the comparative analysis of the two theories of the legal suspension condition and the legal release condition theory, it is proved that the fetus's right can be exercised by its agent under the premise that the fetus has the right ability. It also demonstrates that the civil law protection of foetus must be based on its living birth. The fourth part defines the scope of interests that the fetus should be protected by enumerating the main types of infringing fetus and the actual differences with natural persons, including material personality interests, spiritual personality interests and property interests. In the fifth part, through the comments on the five drafts of the Civil Code and the draft of the General principles of Civil Law, as well as the conclusion and analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the above theories, the legislative suggestions on the protection of the interests of the fetus in the course of the formulation of the Civil Code are obtained. That is to say, "where the interests of the fetus are protected, the fetus shall be regarded as capable of civil rights." However, if the fetus is not alive at birth, its capacity for civil rights does not exist from the outset. "
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 何濤,仲春;民事權(quán)利能力若干問題研究[J];甘肅政法成人教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年03期

2 續(xù)東;;法人的民事權(quán)利能力芻議[J];呂梁教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年01期

3 周軍;;從人格到民事權(quán)利能力的平等性分析[J];貴州社會(huì)科學(xué);2007年06期

4 鄒愛華;;自然人人格和民事權(quán)利能力一致說評析[J];湖北大學(xué)成人教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年05期

5 秦力;;論法人的民事權(quán)利能力[J];商品與質(zhì)量;2011年S5期

6 于德香;;析民事權(quán)利和民事權(quán)利能力可以適當(dāng)分離[J];政治與法律;1992年02期

7 李鴻;論民事權(quán)利和民事權(quán)利能力的分離[J];理論研究;1995年05期

8 孫鵬;民事權(quán)利與民事權(quán)利能力不可分[J];政治與法律;1996年01期

9 楊帆;民事權(quán)利能力制度價(jià)值的反思[J];武漢交通管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年04期

10 傅強(qiáng);論廢除民事權(quán)利能力制度的必要性[J];新視野;2005年05期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 烏魯木齊市沙依巴克區(qū)人民法院 李莎莎;胎兒民事權(quán)利能力之探討[N];新疆法制報(bào)(漢);2013年

2 ;如何認(rèn)定公民的民事權(quán)利能力？[N];解放日報(bào);2003年

3 曉寶;什么是民事權(quán)利能力和民事行為能力[N];山西科技報(bào);2001年

4 北京市朝陽區(qū)人民法院 付春兵　崔析宗;胎兒期間獲得的利益出生后存活應(yīng)得到保護(hù)[N];人民法院報(bào);2011年

5 王小麗;遺腹子能否作為原告[N];人民法院報(bào);2005年

6 普法辦;對方當(dāng)事人不具備簽訂合同的主體資格[N];中國石化報(bào);2007年

7 ;《中華人民共和國民法通則》[N];河北日報(bào);2002年

8 利民;未來公民 權(quán)力何在[N];山西經(jīng)濟(jì)日報(bào);2003年

9 河南省內(nèi)鄉(xiāng)縣人民法院 鎮(zhèn)平縣人民法院 楊慧文 郭云鐵;事故后孩子出生,可否主張撫養(yǎng)費(fèi)[N];檢察日報(bào);2011年

10 王浙安;損害死者名譽(yù) 被判侵權(quán)賠償[N];法治快報(bào);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 王騰;民法典編篡視野下胎兒利益保護(hù)研究[D];山東大學(xué);2017年

2 伊魯;民事權(quán)利能力若干問題研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2005年

3 譚亞偉;論當(dāng)事人能力與民事權(quán)利能力的關(guān)系[D];西南政法大學(xué);2013年

4 谷崢;論胎兒民事權(quán)利能力及權(quán)利保護(hù)[D];吉林大學(xué);2013年

5 張紅艷;村民委員會(huì)的當(dāng)事人能力研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年

6 姚亮;論胎兒民事權(quán)益的保護(hù)[D];大連海事大學(xué);2013年

7 金娟;我國胎兒利益民法保護(hù)的立法構(gòu)想[D];中國海洋大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號：1911022