本文選題：未成年人 + 父母監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)　； 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：未成年人的發(fā)展關(guān)系著一個(gè)國家的未來,因此,給未成年人創(chuàng)造一個(gè)法治、穩(wěn)定的社會(huì)成長環(huán)境是很有必要的(1)�？v觀世界各國,教育、照顧未成年人均被國家列為首要任務(wù),這種行為被認(rèn)為是最崇高的美德。我國在保護(hù)未成年人這一方面的法律規(guī)定則有所欠缺,但隨著我國加入《兒童權(quán)利公約》后,開始逐步重視對未成年人的保護(hù)。即使這樣,我國有關(guān)未成年人受父母侵害的事件仍頻繁發(fā)生,這就暴露出我國未成年人監(jiān)護(hù)制度仍然存在很大缺陷,尤其是未成年人監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷制度。直至2014年《關(guān)于依法處理監(jiān)護(hù)人侵害未成年人權(quán)益行為若干問題的意見》的出臺(tái),作出了當(dāng)未成年人遭受父母侵害后撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)的一系列較完善的規(guī)定,包括發(fā)現(xiàn)舉報(bào)、申請監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷主體、撤銷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)及法定事由,撤銷后的安置和恢復(fù)等,為撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)提供了較明確的法律依據(jù)。2017年《民法總則》的通過,更是以法律的形式對監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)的撤銷及恢復(fù)等問題作出規(guī)定,明確提出在處理未成年人遭受父母侵害的問題上,要堅(jiān)持未成年人利益最大原則和尊重未成年人真實(shí)意愿原則。司法實(shí)踐的過程中,暴露了立法規(guī)定中存在的一些不足之處,例如,沒有相應(yīng)的監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)監(jiān)督機(jī)制,導(dǎo)致國家不能更好地給父母提供專業(yè)的監(jiān)護(hù)指導(dǎo)和幫助,不能對監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷后重新選任監(jiān)護(hù)人及其履行監(jiān)護(hù)職責(zé)的過程進(jìn)行監(jiān)督;舉報(bào)制度規(guī)定存在不妥之處,相關(guān)法律法規(guī)等均規(guī)定相關(guān)個(gè)人和單位可以或應(yīng)當(dāng)行使舉報(bào)權(quán)利,由于權(quán)利不具有強(qiáng)制性,造成這些個(gè)人和單位怠于行使舉報(bào)權(quán)利,且有關(guān)法定受理舉報(bào)機(jī)關(guān)的規(guī)定不明確,最終導(dǎo)致公權(quán)力機(jī)關(guān)不能給予未成年人及時(shí)的法律救濟(jì);申請監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷的主體范圍有缺漏,未將檢察機(jī)關(guān)納入其范疇,造成司法資源浪費(fèi),也不利于檢察機(jī)關(guān)參與到未成年人保護(hù)工作中;監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷后未成年人的安置及監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)的恢復(fù)問題規(guī)定不明,導(dǎo)致司法實(shí)踐中困難重重,而且給予法官過大的自由裁量權(quán),可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致不能切實(shí)保護(hù)未成年人的合法權(quán)益的后果。當(dāng)然,未成年人遭受父母侵害的問題得不到有效解決還有一個(gè)原因就是:傳統(tǒng)觀念對民眾的思想影響較大,且民眾的法治意識(shí)普遍較薄弱,尤其是對父母打罵未成年子女這一現(xiàn)象,父母認(rèn)為是家事,外人無權(quán)插手,外人也不愿多生是非,即使看到有些家長對孩子施暴,也會(huì)放任不管,使未成年人的身心嚴(yán)重受損�；趯ΜF(xiàn)實(shí)的反思,從法律層面出發(fā),我們應(yīng)該考慮如何彌補(bǔ)立法不足,使未成年人監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷制度最大限度發(fā)揮作用,切實(shí)保護(hù)未成年人的合法權(quán)益,避免遭受來自父母的無端侵害。基于對上述問題的思考,本文以保護(hù)未成年人為出發(fā)點(diǎn)和落腳點(diǎn),深入探究未成年人的合法權(quán)益遭受其監(jiān)護(hù)人的不法侵害時(shí)撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)的問題。通過對我國立法及司法實(shí)踐現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行分析,總結(jié)出未成年人監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷制度存在的問題,并提出完善建議,希冀促進(jìn)我國監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷制度進(jìn)一步發(fā)展,為未成年人的保護(hù)做好鋪墊工作,以期最大限度地維護(hù)未成年人的合法權(quán)益,從而規(guī)制父母對未成年子女的不適當(dāng)行為。
[Abstract]:The development of minors is related to the future of a country. Therefore, it is necessary to create a rule of law for minors and a stable environment for social growth (1). Throughout the world, education, taking care of the underage per capita is the most important task, and this behavior is considered to be the most noble virtue. The legal provisions are deficient, but as China joins the Convention on the rights of children, the protection of minors has been gradually attached to the protection of minors. Even so, the incidents of minors' infringement on minors still occur frequently in our country, which reveals that the guardianship system of minors in our country still has great defects, especially the withdrawal of the guardianship of minors. The system of marketing. Until 2014, the opinions on Several Issues concerning the violation of the rights and interests of minors by guardians in accordance with the law were introduced, and a series of more perfect regulations were made for the revocation of guardianship when the minors were violated by their parents, including the discovery of a report, the application of the right of custody to revoke the owner, the revocation of the standard and the legal cause, and the revocation of the revocation. It provides a clearer legal basis for the revocation of guardianship, which provides a clearer legal basis for the general provisions of the civil law in.2017, and makes a provision for the revocation and recovery of guardianship in the form of law. It is clear that the principle of the maximum interests of minors and the respect for minors should be persisted in dealing with the problems of the juvenile being infringed upon by the parents. The principle of real intention. In the process of judicial practice, some deficiencies in the legislative provisions have been exposed, for example, without a corresponding monitoring mechanism of custody, the state can not provide the parents with a better guidance and assistance to their parents, and can not reelect guardians and perform their guardianship duties after the revocation of guardianship. Supervision; the provisions of the reporting system are not appropriate, and the relevant laws and regulations stipulate that the relevant individuals and units may or should exercise the right to report it. Because the rights are not mandatory, these individuals and units are not able to exercise the right to report them, and the provisions on the legal admissibility organs are not clear, and the public authority can not. The legal remedies are given to minors in time; the subject scope of the application for the revocation of the guardianship is absent, and the procuratorial organ is not included in its category, which causes the waste of the judicial resources and the procuratorial organs' participation in the protection of the minors. After the revocation of the guardianship, the resettlement of the minors and the restoration of the guardianship rights are unknown, leading to the judicature. There are many difficulties in practice, and the excessive discretion of the judges may lead to the consequences that can not effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of the minors. Of course, the problem that the minors are violated by the parents can not be effectively solved. One reason is that the traditional ideas have great influence on the people's thought, and the people's consciousness of the rule of law is universal. It is very weak, especially for parents to scold the minor children, parents think it is family, outsiders do not have the right to intervene, outsiders do not want to be more born. Even if some parents are brutal to their children, they will let the minors' body and mind seriously damaged. Based on the reality, we should consider the law. How to make up for the lack of legislation, make the system of minors' custody revocation to the maximum function, protect the legitimate rights and interests of minors, and avoid the unwarranted infringement from their parents. Based on the thinking of the above problems, this article takes the protection of minors as the starting point and the foothold, and deeply explores the legal rights and interests of minors. By analyzing the current situation of legislation and judicial practice in our country, this paper summarizes the existing problems of the system of revocation of the minors' guardianship rights, and puts forward some suggestions to improve the further development of the system of the revocation of the guardianship right in our country, so as to make a good paving for the protection of the minors, with a view to the maximum limit. We should safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of minors so as to regulate parents' inappropriate behavior to their minor children.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 佟一清;;關(guān)于撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)制度的解讀與思考[J];法制與社會(huì);2016年06期

2 汪曼喬;;撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)后未成年人權(quán)益后續(xù)保障問題研究——從徐州撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)案談起[J];預(yù)防青少年犯罪研究;2016年01期

3 徐婧;戴玉欣;;芻議不適格父母監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)的撤銷與后續(xù)保障——以全國首例民政部門申請剝奪監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)案為研究范本[J];法制博覽;2016年04期

4 朱詠梅;;上海首例撤銷親生母親監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)案始末[J];法律與生活;2016年03期

5 葛明瑜;;論我國未成年人監(jiān)護(hù)干預(yù)制度之建構(gòu)[J];東南司法評(píng)論;2015年00期

6 姚毅奇;馮源;;論國家對父母監(jiān)護(hù)人資格的干預(yù)—以剝奪監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)第一案為例[J];海峽法學(xué);2015年03期

7 趙卿;李慶;;未成年人檢察公益訴訟制度構(gòu)建研究——以全國首例民政部門申請撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)案為例[J];青少年犯罪問題;2015年05期

8 程麗;;當(dāng)前兒童家庭監(jiān)護(hù)存在的問題及解決策略探析[J];教育導(dǎo)刊(下半月);2015年09期

9 王牧;姬廣勇;高晶;;民政局可申請撤銷未成年人父母的監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)并成為監(jiān)護(hù)人[J];人民司法;2015年14期

10 彭剛;;剝奪與回歸:我國未成年人監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷制度的建構(gòu)機(jī)理及其完善[J];寧夏社會(huì)科學(xué);2015年04期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 徐清;;撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)情形應(yīng)進(jìn)一步擴(kuò)大[N];檢察日報(bào);2015年

2 苗春雷;;嚴(yán)重侵害權(quán)益將轉(zhuǎn)移監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)[N];煙臺(tái)日報(bào);2015年

3 李卓謙;張玲玲;;“監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移之訴應(yīng)慎之又慎”[N];民主與法制時(shí)報(bào);2015年

4 張維;;修法賦權(quán)政府直接剝奪監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)[N];法制日報(bào);2015年

5 陳曉英 ;丁國鋒;;撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)，不再只是“傳說”[N];法制日報(bào);2015年

6 ;民政部等四部門規(guī)定父母虐待孩子可剝奪監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)[N];中國社會(huì)報(bào);2015年

7 陳宏光;;讓新規(guī)激活“監(jiān)護(hù)資格撤銷”[N];上海法治報(bào);2015年

8 周文;;完善撤銷監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)制度 更好地維護(hù)兒童權(quán)益[N];中國婦女報(bào);2014年

9 徐慧玲;丁秀偉;;喚醒沉睡的監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)撤銷制度[N];中國婦女報(bào);2014年

10 陳穎婷;;監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移能否落戶 上海囡“黑戶”十年尷尬誰解[N];上海法治報(bào);2014年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 朱雪林;加拿大成年監(jiān)護(hù)制度研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 晁新寶;我國弱勢兒童權(quán)利保護(hù)研究[D];北京化工大學(xué);2015年

2 許濤;我國困境兒童救助保護(hù)法律問題研究[D];蘭州大學(xué);2015年

3 梁秋芬;論我國監(jiān)護(hù)制度之完善[D];蘇州大學(xué);2014年

4 王娜;我國未成年人監(jiān)護(hù)干預(yù)制度研究[D];河北經(jīng)貿(mào)大學(xué);2014年

5 李澄路;國家責(zé)任視野下未成年人監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移研究[D];西南交通大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1914233