司法如何回应不同性别的生育权诉求——基于我国审判实践的考察  

The Judicial Response to Reproductive Rights Claims across Different Genders——A Study Based on Chinese Judicial Practice

作　　者：姚建宗[1] 李菁 YAO Jianzong;LI Jing

机构地区：[1]吉林大学法学院,吉林长春130015

出　　处：《思想战线》2025年第2期137-145,共9页Thinking

基　　金：最高人民法院2024年度司法研究重大课题“专门法院设置问题研究”阶段性成果(GFZDKT2024B22-2)。

摘　　要：法律如何回应不同性别的生育权诉求,这不仅是一个立法理论问题,在司法实践中也值得认真对待。现有的法律规范及理论学说对此都没能给出明确的答案。实证研究显示,我国法院对大多数生育权诉求都选择了回避,只对极少数进行了间接回应,且仅倾向于保障女性的消极生育权;对男性的生育权主张认定则较为苛刻,特殊情况下会以其他途径予以间接的补偿性回应。这体现了司法在面对家事和性别纠纷时相对中立、谦抑的立场,同时也是在法律规则相对模糊时,法院组织运作中的“法律内生性”的表现。为使司法更好地回应公民的生育权主张,一方面需要在规范上提供更明确的指引,另一方面也需要设置适当的容错机制。The judicial response to reproductive rights claims across different genders is not merely a theoretical legislative issue but also a critical concern in judicial practice.Current legal norms and theoretical frameworks have not provided clear answers to this question.Empirical research indicates that Chinese courts have largely avoided directly addressing reproductive rights claims,offering only indirect responses in limited cases and primarily protecting women’s negative reproductive rights.In contrast,men’s reproductive rights claims are subject to stricter judicial scrutiny and,in special circumstances,may receive indirect compensatory responses through other alternative legal means.This reflects the judiciary’s relatively neutral and restrained approach to family and gender disputes and highlights the phenomenon of the“legal endogeneity”in court operations when legal rules lack clarity.To enhance judicial responses to reproductive rights claims,it is essential to establish clearer normative guidelines and implement appropriate fault-tolerance mechanisms.

关 键 词：生育权 性别 实证研究 家事审判 法律内生性 

分 类 号：DF0-052[政治法律—法学理论]