论家庭教育中司法机关的角色定位  

Role Orientation of the Judiciary in Family Education

作　　者：邱格屏[1] 牛智辉 Qiu Geping;Niu Zhihui

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学刑事法学院

出　　处：《青少年犯罪问题》2022年第6期3-14,共12页Issues on Juvenile Crimes and Delinquency

摘　　要：《未成年人保护法》的修订与《家庭教育促进法》的颁布赋予司法机关适度干预家庭教育的权力。司法机关对未成年人的法定保护范围扩大,在离婚案件中更加关注未成年人的意见,建立同社会组织和政府部门的联动机制,均能有效促进家庭教育的正向发展。在“国家亲权理论”的基础上,司法机关有权要求父母接受家庭教育指导,对于严重损害未成年人利益的行为还可以作出人身安全保护令或者撤销监护人资格,运用强制手段保护未成年人。但是,两部法律尚未规定监护人怠于接受指导的后果,司法机关实施家庭教育指导的内容与方式较为混乱,还缺乏后续长期效果检验机制。因此,有必要在优化未成年人福利政策的前提下,制定家庭教育指导实施细则,明确司法机关与监护人双方责任,参考“亲职令”构建指导效果评测机制。The revision of Law on the Protection of Minors and the introduction of Law on the Promotion of Family Education have given the judiciary the power to intervene moderately in family education. The expansion of the scope of legal protection for minors by the judiciary, the increased attention to the opinions of minors in divorce cases, and the establishment of a mechanism to link up with social organizations and government departments are all effective in promoting the positive development of family education. On the basis of the "Parens Patriae Theory", the judiciary has the authority to require parents to receive family education guidance, and may issue personal safety protection order or revoke guardianship for acts that seriously harm the interests of minors, using coercive means to protect minors. However, the two laws have not yet mentioned the consequences of guardians’ negligence in accepting guidance, and the content and manner of family education guidance by judicial organs are confusing, and there is a lack of follow-up long-term effect testing mechanism. Therefore, it is necessary to formulate rules for the implementation of family education guidance under the premise of optimizing the welfare policy for minors, clarify the responsibilities of both judicial organs and guardians, and build a mechanism for evaluating the effectiveness of guidance with reference to the "Parenting Orders".

关 键 词：强制家庭教育指导 家庭教育促进法 未成年人保护 司法机关 

分 类 号：D922.16[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学] D922.1[政治法律—法学]