题名

論離婚後父母對未成年子女權利義務之行使負擔:美國法上子女最佳利益原則的發展與努力方向

并列篇名

Resolving Child Custody Disputes after Divorce-The Development of the Best Interest of the Child Doctrine in America

作者

李立如(Li-Ju Lee)

关键词

子女最佳利益 ; 友善父母條款 ; 共同監護 ; 主要照顧者原則 ; 過去照顧模式 ; the best interest of the child ; friendly parent provision ; joint custody ; primary caretaker preference ; past caretaking standard

期刊名称

歐美研究

卷期/出版年月

40卷3期(2010 / 09 / 01)

页次

779 - 828

内容语文

繁體中文

中文摘要

本文旨在討論「子女最佳利益原則」於處理離婚後父母對未成年子女權利義務行使負擔之爭議時所面臨的困境,並探究美國學界與實務界對此所做的回應與未來的發展方向。子女最佳利益原則確立以來,由於內涵不夠具體明確,引發了種種批評及實務運作上的困難。因此,近年來美國實務界嘗試尋找各種替代標準。本文討論上述發展,分析各個替代原則的利弊得失,並論及程序面上為落實子女最佳利益原則所進行的制度設計與運作。作者認為,多元程序的建立及司法者角色的重新塑造應是未來努力方向。

英文摘要

The problem of child custody after divorce is one of the most important yet difficult issues in American family law. Since the 1970s, the "Best Interest of the Child" doctrine has been guiding courts in determining custody cases in the United States. The BIC doctrine is reflective of social and legal commitments to promote the welfare of children. However, the BIC doctrine is criticized heavily for being vague, and thereby permitting arbitrary judicial decisions in the name of the interests of the children. Discontent with the BIC doctrine, the American legal community has begun looking for another test to clarify or even replace the troubled doctrine. This essay argues that the proposed alternative tests do not live up to expectations because they fail to resolve the problem of vagueness while raising still more questions regarding the interests of the child. The essay also suggests that an effort to build a court-centered mechanism, with various procedures and services, would seem to be a more plausible approach.

主题分类 人文學 > 人文學綜合
社會科學 > 社會科學綜合
参考文献
  1. 雷文玫(1999)。以「子女最佳利益」之名:離婚後父母對未成年子女權利義務行使與負擔之研究。台大法學論叢,28(3),245-309。
    連結:
  2. American Law Institute(2002).Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution: Analysis and Recommendations.New York:LexisNexis.
  3. Artis, J. E.(2004).Judging the best interests of the child: Judge's ac-counts of the tender years doctrine.Law & Society Review,38(4),769-806.
  4. Barlow, B.(2005).Divorce child custody mediation: In order to form a more perfect disunion?.Cleveland State Law Review,52(4),499-525.
  5. Bartlett, K. T.(1999).Child custody in the 21st century: How the American Law Institute proposes to achieve predictability and still protect the individual child's best interests.Willamette Law Review,35(3),467-483.
  6. Bartlett, K. T.(2002).U.S. custody law and trends in the context of the ALI principles of the law of family dissolution.Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law,10(1),5-53.
  7. Bartlett, K. T.(2000).Comparing race and sex discrimination in custody cases.Hofstra Law Review,28(4),883-894.
  8. Blond, B. S.(1984).In the child's best interests-a better way: The case for presumptive joint custody in Missouri.University of Missouri-Kansas City Law Review,52(4),567-597.
  9. Bow, J. N.,Quinnell, F. A.(2002).A critical review of child custody evaluation reports.Family Court Review,40(2),164-176.
  10. Boxer-Macomber, L.(2003).Revisiting the impact of California's mandatory custody mediation program on victims of domestic violence through a feminist positionality lens..St. Thomas Law Review,15(4),883-906.
  11. Brinig, M. F.,Buckley, F. H.(1988).Joint custody: Bonding and monitoring theories.Indiana Law Journal,73(2),393-427.
  12. Bryant, W. M.(2002).Solomon's new sword: Tennessee's parenting plan, the role of attorneys, and the care perspective.Tennessee Law Review,70(1),221-249.
  13. Catania, F. J. Jr.(2001).Learning from the process of decision: The parenting plan.Brigham Young University Law Review,2001(3),857-889.
  14. Cohen, I. M.(1988).Postdecree litigation-Is joint custody to blame?.Family and Conciliation Courts Review,36(1),41-53.
  15. Crippen, G.(1990).Stumbling beyond best interests of the child: Reexamining child custody standard-Setting in the wake of Minnesota's four year experiment with the primary caretaker preference.Minnesota Law Review,75(2),427-503.
  16. Crippen, G. L.,Stuhlman, S. M.(2001).Minnesota's alternatives to primary caretaker placements: Too much of a good thing?.William Mitchell Law Review,28(2),677-695.
  17. Dore, M. K.(2004).The friendly parent concept: A flawed factor for child custody.Loyola Journal of Public Interest Law,6(1),41-56.
  18. Ducote, R.(2002).Guardians ad litem in private custody litigation: The case for abolition.Loyola Journal of Public Interest Law,3(2),106-151.
  19. Emery, R. E.,Laumann-Billings, L.,Waldron, M. C.,Sbarra, D. A.,Dillon P.(2001).Child custody mediation and litigation: Custody, contact, and co-parenting 12 years after initial dispute resolution.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,69(2),323-332.
  20. Fineman, M.(1995).The neutered mother, the sexual family and other twentieth century tragedies.New York:Routledge Press.
  21. Fineman, M.(1988).Dominant discourse, professional language, and legal change in child custody decisionmaking.Harvard Law Review,101(4),727-774.
  22. Fischer, K.,Vidmar, N.,Ellis, R.(1993).The culture of battering and the role of mediation in domestic violence cases.SMU Law Review,46(4),2117-2174.
  23. Foster, H. H.,Freed, D. J.(1972).A bill of rights for children.Family Law Quarterly,6(3),343-376.
  24. Gagnon, A. G.(1992).Ending mandatory divorce mediation for battered women.Harvard Women's Law Journal,15(1),272-294.
  25. Gardner, R. A.(1982).Joint custody is not for everyone.Family Advocate,5,7-9.
  26. Gibbons, K.(2006).The ties that bind: Why Texas should adopt a presumption that relocation is not in the best interest of the child.Texas Wesleyan Law Review,12(2),555-584.
  27. Graham, K.(2001).How the ALI child custody principles help eliminate gender and sexual orientation bias from child custody determinations.Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy,8(1),323-331.
  28. Greenberg, J. G.(2005).Domestic violence and the danger of joint custody presumptions.Northern Illinois University Law Review,25(3),403-431.
  29. Grillo, T.(1991).The mediation alternative: Process dangers for women.Yale Law Journal,100(6),1545-1610.
  30. Hazlewood, M. E.(2004).The new Texas Ad Litem Statues: Is it really protecting the best interest of minor children?.St. Mary's Law Journal,35(4),1035-1702.
  31. Henry, R. K.(1994)."Primary caretaker": Is it a ruse?.Family Advocate,17,53-56.
  32. Jacobs, S. B.(1997).The hidden gender bias behind "the best interest of the child" standard in custody decisions.Georgia State University Law Review,13(3),845-901.
  33. Johnston, J. R.(2005).Children of divorce who reject a parent and refuse visitation: Recent research and social policy implications for the alienated child.Family Law Quarterly,38(4),757-775.
  34. Kay, H. H.(2002).No-fault divorce and child custody: Chilling out the gender wars.Family Law Quarterly,36(1),27-47.
  35. Kelly, J. B.(2002).Psychological and legal interventions for parents and children in custody and access disputes: Current research and practice.Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law,10(1),129-163.
  36. Kelly, J. B.(2005).Developing beneficial parenting plan models for children following separation and civorce.Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers,19(2),237-254.
  37. Levmore, S.(1998).Joint custody and strategic behavior.Indiana Law Journal,73(2),429-439.
  38. Lidman, R. C.,Hollingsworth, B. R.(1998).The guardian ad litem in the child custody cases: The contours of our judicial system stretched beyond recognition.George Mason Law Review,6(2),255-306.
  39. Maccoby, E. E.,Mnookin, R. H.(1992).Dividing the child-Social and legal dilemmas of custody.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  40. Martindale, D. A.(2007).Model standard of practice for child custody evaluation.Family Court Review,45(1),70-90.
  41. Mason, M. A.(1999).The custody wars: Why children are losing the legal battle and what we can do about it.New York:Basic Books Press.
  42. Mason, M. A.(1994).From father's property to children's rights: The history of child custody in the United States.New York:Columbia Press.
  43. Mercer, K. L.(1988).A content analysis of judicial decision-making-How judges use the primary caretaker standard to make a custody determination.William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law,5(1),1-148.
  44. Mnookin, R. H.,Kornhauser, L.(1979).Bargaining in the shadow of the law: The case of divorce.Yale Law Journal,88(5),950-997.
  45. Murray, T. H.(1996).The worth of a child.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
  46. Peskind, S. N.(2005).Determining the undeterminable: The best interest of the child standard as an imperfect but necessary guidepost to determine child custody.Northern Illinois University Law Review,25(3),449-482.
  47. Pollet, S. L.,Lombreglia, M.(2008).A nationwide survey of mandatory parent education.Family Court Review,46(2),375-390.
  48. Ramsey, S. H.(2001).Constructing parenthood for stepparents: Parents by estoppel and de facto parents under the American Law Institute's principles of the law of family dissolution.Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy,8(1),285-301.
  49. Rhode, D. L.(1989).Justice and gender: Sex discriminations and the law.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  50. Schafran, L. H.(1990).Gender and justice: Florida and the nation.Florida Law Review,42(1),181-208.
  51. Schepard, A.(2005).Mental health evaluations in child custody disputes.Family Court Review,43(2),187-190.
  52. Schneider, E.(1986).The dialectic of rights and politics: Perspectives from the women's movement.New York University Law Review,61(4),589-652.
  53. Schulman, J.,Pitt, V.(1982).Second thoughts on joint custody: Analysis of legislation and its implications for women and children.Golden Gate University Law Review,12(3),538-543.
  54. Singer, J. B.,Reynolds, W. L.(1998).A dissent on joint custody.Maryland Law Review,47(2),497-523.
  55. Ver Steegh, N.(2005).Differentiating types of domestic violence: Implications for child custody.Louisiana Law Review,65(4),1379-1429.
  56. Wagner, D. M.(2001).Balancing "parents are" and "parents do" in the supreme court's constitutionalized family law: Some implications for the ALI proposals on de facto parenthood.Brigham Young University Law Review,2001(3),1175-1187.
  57. Wallace, M. H.(2007).Child support savings account: An innovated approach to child support enforcement.North Carolina Law Review,85(4),1155-1192.
  58. Williams, G. I.(2005).Looking at joint custody through the language and attitude of attorneys.Justice System Journal,26(1),1-31.
  59. Woodhouse, B. B.(2002).Talking about children's rights in judicial custody and visitation decision-making.Family Law Quarterly,36(1),105-133.
  60. Yaeger, K.(2005).An examination or relocation law in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island: Successful trends toward determining the best interests of the child.Suffolk Journal of Trial & Appellate Advocacy,10(2),153-172.
  61. Zapata, R.(2003).Child custody in Texas and the best interest standard: In the best interest of whom?.Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Minority Issues,6(1),197-217.
  62. 李宏文(2003)。台北大學法學系=Department of Law, National Taipei University。
  63. 沈冠伶(2006)。親權及交付子女事件之外國裁判的承認及執行與「未成年子女最佳利益保護」原則。台灣本土法學雜誌,84,94-105。
  64. 殷海光基金會編(2007)。自由主義與新世紀台灣。台北=Taipei:允晨文化=Laurel。
  65. 高鳳仙(1985)。試評子女最高利益原則在美國監護法上之適用得失。中美離婚法之比較研究,台北=Taipei:
  66. 彭南元(2007)。祖父母訪視孫子女所引起之爭議—以爭議解決觀點評析美國最高法院Troxel v. Granville一案之判決。美國最高法院重要判決之研究 2000-2003,台北=Taipei:
  67. 劉宏恩(1997)。夫妻離婚後「子女最佳利益」之酌定—從英美實務看我國民法親屬篇新規定之適用。軍法專刊,43(12),24-55。
被引用次数
  1. 黃詩淳,邵軒磊(2019)。人工智慧與法律資料分析之方法與應用:以單獨親權酌定裁判的預測模型為例。臺大法學論叢,48(4),2023-2073。
  2. 黃詩淳、邵軒磊(2018)。酌定子女親權之重要因素:以決策樹方法分析相關裁判。臺大法學論叢,47(1),299-344。
  3. 紀冠伶、施慧玲(2018)。離婚訴訟「先搶先贏」的實務經驗敘事分析-兼論幼年子女最佳利益的司法裁量基準。法令月刊,69(8),75-102。
  4. 溫翎佑、黃翠紋(2017)。親權酌定事件中未成年人最佳利益維護之實務困境—從社工員的觀點。亞洲家庭暴力與性侵害期刊,13(1),1-26。
  5. (2017)。我國基層校園關於「兒童最佳利益」 特定事件實務運作疑義之初探- 以聯合國《兒童權利公約》第三條為中心。社區發展季刊,157,141-150。
  6. (2020)。離婚後親權酌定事件中的子女最佳利益。中原財經法學,45,1-58。