生育权的教义学构造  

The Legal Dogmatic Construction of Reproductive Rights

作　　者：刘欢[1] LIU Huan

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院

出　　处：《中国政法大学学报》2023年第3期140-155,共16页Journal Of CUPL

基　　金：司法部国家法治与法学理论研究项目“人类胚胎基因编辑立法研究”(项目批准号:19SFB2035)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：技术发展与观念更新促成了多元化的生育利益主张,但目前我国理论与实务未就生育权的规范构造形成共识。生育权具有基本权利与私法权利双重面向。基本权利语境下,生育权凭借其道德性和实践性融入《宪法》“人权条款”确立的价值秩序,并经由“人身自由条款”的价值转换具有主观权利的内涵。私法意义上的生育权属于人格权,《妇女权益保障法》第32条发生设立私权的效果,构成女性生育权的请求权基础;男性生育权须借助《民法典》一般人格权予以保护。通过基本权利和私法权利的双重检视可知,《人类辅助生殖技术规范》禁止单身女性实施辅助生殖技术对女性生育权构成不当限制,生育伙伴之间生育意愿不一致是权利行使的边界问题,而不构成权利冲突。Technological development and conceptual renewal have led to a diversity of claims concerning reproductive interests,but there is currently no consensus in theory and practice on the normative construction of reproductive rights in China.The reproductive rights have a dual orientation towards fundamental rights and private law rights.In the context of fundamental rights,reproductive rights,by virtue of its moral and practical nature,are integrated into the value order established by the“human rights clause”of the Constitution and takes on the connotation of a subjective right through the transformation of the value of the“personal liberty clause”.In terms of private law rights,reproductive rights are personality rights.Article 32 of the Law on the Protection of Women's Rights and Interests has the effect of creating a private right,forming the basis of a woman's right to reproduction;a man's right to reproduction must be protected by the general personality rights of the Civil Code.The dual examination of fundamental rights and private law rights shows that the prohibition of assisted reproductive technology for single women in the Code of Assisted Human Reproductive Technology constitutes an undue restriction on women's reproductive rights,and that the inconsistency of reproductive intentions between reproductive partners is a matter of the boundaries of the exercise of rights and does not constitute a conflict of rights.

关 键 词：生育权 基本权利 基本人权 人身自由 人格权 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]