儒家如何看待脱離婚姻的生育行為——由單身女性「凍卵」問題引發的法律與倫理討論

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-47
Author(s):  
Jie BAI
Keyword(s):  
Marriage Rate ◽  
Single Women ◽  
Confucian Ethics ◽  
Single Woman ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
The Family ◽  
Conservative Policy ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
Reproductive Activities

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.近年來得益於女性地位的提升與名人效應，單身女性凍卵問題日趨成為社會輿論關注的焦點，由此也引發了法學界對單身女性生育權的討論。然而，單身女性凍卵不僅僅是一個法律議題，更是一個倫理問題。不僅法律和法規的制定和修訂中多有涉及對倫理的關照，凍卵的臨床實踐中也廣泛存在對倫理的考量。在結婚率和生育率持續走低當下社會，相當一部分單身 女性選擇凍卵的動機是希望脱離婚姻而進行自主的生育行 為。值得深思的是，東亞的儒教國家對輔助生殖的使用限制最為嚴格、政策最為保守。本文試圖通過分析儒家會如何看待脱離婚姻的生育行為，來探討儒學倫理對單身女性凍卵抱有怎麽樣的態度、能夠帶來怎麽的啟示。本文認為，儘管在法律維度上應該肯定單身女性擁有生育權，但在倫理層面上，脱離婚姻的生育行為應該極為審慎，因為其有違儒家倫理中對家庭秩序的看重，同時也讓“雙親撫育”難以得到實現。In recent years, thanks to the promotion of the status of women and the celebrity effect, the issue of the frozen eggs of single women has become a focus of public opinion, leading to discussion of the reproductive rights of single women in the legal arena. However, single women's frozen eggs are also an ethical issue. The laws and regulations not only involve ethics, but also ethical considerations in the clinical practice of frozen eggs. In today's society, in which the marriage rate and fertility rate continue to decline, many single women choose to freeze their eggs to distinguish between reproductive activities and marriage. It is worth thinking about the fact that Confucian East Asia has the strictest restrictions and most conservative policy on the use of assisted reproduction. This paper explores how Confucian ethics have a different position on single women’s frozen eggs by analyzing how Confucianism views fertility behaviors that are separated from marriage. It argues that although it is certain that a single woman has the right to give birth in the legal dimension, ethically, the procreative behavior of marriage should be taken with caution, as it violates the Confucian ethic of the family order by making parental care more difficult.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 45 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

scholarly journals 知情同意的權利主體: 儒家倫理視角下的考察

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-28
Author(s):  
Tongwei YANG ◽  
Zhangqi FENG
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Family Relationship ◽  
Family Values ◽  
Reciprocal Relationship ◽  
Confucian Ethics ◽  
Individual Autonomy ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
The Family ◽  
Physician Relationship ◽  
The Right

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.“ 知情同意”這個在西方文化背景中產生的倫理和法律術語在中國仍然是一個比較新的概念。尤其是對於知情同意的權利主體這一基本問題，在立法實踐和臨床實務中仍存在認識模糊和不一致之處。本文基於儒家家庭倫理的基本精神——尊重個人意願與家庭關懷的統一，提出了關於知情同意權利主體的立法建議。在儒家倫理中，主張“和而不同”、“互以對方為重”，體現了尊重個人意願的思想。在儒家倫理中還主張“父慈子孝”、“兄友弟恭”、“夫婦和順”，體現了家庭關懷。可見，在儒家倫理視野下，知情同意權利並非由家屬包辦，也非僅僅屬於患者而和家庭無關，而是在患者做主前提下的家庭參與，是患者做主與家庭關懷的統一。所以，對於有同意能力的患者而言，其本人所作的同意表示才具有法律效力；只有在某些特殊的情形下患者家屬才可以代為簽署知情同意書或者代行知情同意權利。Informed consent has been a core principle endorsed by modern Western medical ethics. It involves patient-physician relationship as well as family relationship. It has been a focus of debates since it was introduced to the Chinese world whether informed consent is agreeable to the cultural ethos of China, and if not, whether it can be applied transculturally. This paper first discusses three principles in the policy of informed consent: 1. the principle of individual autonomy; 2. the principle of non-maleficence; and 3. the principle of effectiveness. Then the paper explores the issue informed consent within the framework of the Confucian concept of family and family values, indicating that in Confucian ethics, the idea of“ harmony in diversity” acknowledges the importance of individuality whereas the notion of reciprocal relationship emphasizes the interconnectedness of everyone in family and society at large. We should always look for a balanced point between the right of the patient and the duty of the physician, and between the interest of an individual person and the interest of the family as a unit.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 183 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

scholarly journals Family Life for Children in State Care

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 715-747
Author(s):  
Clarie Breen ◽  
Jenny Krutzinna ◽  
Katre Luhamaa ◽  
Marit Skivenes
Keyword(s):  
Family Life ◽  
Foster Parents ◽  
Limited Extent ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Family Unit ◽  
Theoretical Literature ◽  
Biological Parents ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right

Abstract This paper examines what set of familial circumstances allow for the justifiable interference with the right to respect for family life under Article 8, echr. We analyse all the Courts’ judgments on adoptions from care to find out what the Court means by a “family unit” and the “child´s best interest”. Our analysis show that the status and respect of the child’s de facto family life is changing. This resonates with a view that children do not only have formal rights, but that they are recognised as individuals within the family unit that states and courts must address directly. Family is both biological parents and child relationships, as well between children and foster parents, and to a more limited extent between siblings themselves. The Court’s understanding of family is in line with the theoretical literature, wherein the concept of family reflects the bonds created by personal, caring relationships and activities.

scholarly journals 關於放棄臨床無效治療的倫理學思考

2000 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-140
Author(s):  
Yongsong GUO
Keyword(s):  
Social Situation ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Moral Pluralism ◽  
Medical Progress ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
The Family ◽  
Futile Treatment ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Other Regarding

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.對於沒有臨床救治希望的病人，要不要繼續治療？誰有最終的決定權？這既是臨床醫療問題，又是一個涉及社會倫理法規的問題。對於這樣的病人，不放棄治療可能意味著要消耗更多的醫療資源但又無法挽救病人，但是如果放棄治療，可能會遇到更多的來自社會傳統的、倫理法規的問題。筆者認為，在社會多元化發展的今天，面對臨床無效治療，應在尊重病人或病人家屬有最終決定權的前提下，以一定道德、法規為依據，按照一定的醫療程式和法律手續進行處理，可能是更為符合人道和社會公眾利益的理性選擇。There has not been a clear medical definition of futility. The concept of futile treatment involves not only medical, but also social, ethical, and legal components. This paper argues that in today's pluralistic moral circumstances, the patient and/or the family should have the final right to decision regarding futile treatment.Some are opposed to renouncing futile treatment, whatever futility is defined. For them, first, abandoning treatment is in conflict with the physician's basic duty of offering treatment. Second, giving up treatment also gives up the chance of making medical progress by attempting to treat the patient. Third, the patient would thereby lose the opportunity of prolonging the life. And finally, it would change the good image of the physician (as taking care of the patient). On the other hand, those who support renouncing futile treatment offer different reasons. First, giving up futile treatment will turn out to be respecting the value of the patient's life. Second, It would help people recognize the natural limit of contemporary medical development. Third, it would facilitate a reasonable pattern of distributing scarce medical resources. And finally, it could reduce the suffering of the patient. As a result, we face a social situation of moral pluralism: people disagree with each other regarding renouncing futile treatment.A difficult practical issue is who has the right to decide renouncing futile treatment. This paper argues that, giving individuals hold conflicting views of life, valoue and morality, the patient should have the final decision power regarding his/her own treatment. If the patient is incompetent, then the family should have the deciding right. In this respect we should overcome the longstanding medical paternalism. In addition, society should establish a prcocedure to regulate and facilitate the decision-mading of renouncing futile treatment.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 16 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

scholarly journals 儒家“誠”基礎上的器官家庭捐獻

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-74
Author(s):  
Yu CAI
Keyword(s):  
Organ Donation ◽  
Family Involvement ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Confucian Ethics ◽  
Next Of Kin ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
The Gift ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.本文首先探討了儒家的“誠”與作為人之本性的“仁”之間的關係，指出“誠”是“仁”的前提與基礎。筆者認為“誠”賦予“仁”三個基本特徵：“真摯性”、“無外在目的性”和“客觀性”。這三個特徵都與儒家家庭和家庭成員間的“親親之愛”緊密聯繫。其後，本文提出儒家排斥“鄉願”式的器官捐獻。同時，文章指出，由於“誠”的要求，儒家認為對家庭成員的“親親之愛”應該是對非家庭成員的仁愛的前提、基礎和不可或缺的必要條件。因而，個人捐獻原則是與“誠”的價值觀存在一定的矛盾，而家庭捐獻原則才是符合儒家倫理的。最後，本文對人體器官的家庭捐獻原則進行了制度設計。Organ donation is the gift of an organ to help someone who needs a transplant to survive. Yet with limited organs available, the following question arises. Who should be given priority in terms of donation procedures—the individual who has personally committed to offer his/her organs to anyone in need, or the legal next of kin, i.e., family members? This essay approaches this question with reference to the Confucian ethics of sincerity (cheng), which is viewed as a precondition for the ethics of humanness (ren), arguing that family members should be given priority in decisions on organ donation. The author recommends that a policy of family consent for organ donation be implemented, as such a policy would reflect the significant role that family should play in making decisions on critical issues such as organ donation. The essay concludes that rather than emphasizing the right of individuals to decide what will happen after they die, a policy of family involvement would encourage more people to become donors and avoid conflict in cases of disagreement between donors and family members.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 75 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

Markup Fragment in the RuTuBiC Linguistic Corpus. Code-Switching or Lexical Borrowing?

2021 ◽  
pp. 91-104
Author(s):  
Zoya I. Rezanova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Mother Tongue ◽  
Code Switching ◽  
National Language ◽  
Speech Corpus ◽  
Lexical Borrowing ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Status ◽  
Error Annotation ◽  
Turkic Languages ◽  
The Right

The article presents a solution to one of the problems of special linguistic markup in the RuTuBiC corpus – the Russian Speech Corpus of Russian-Turkic Bilinguals, asso-ciated with error annotation at the lexical level. The corpus includes three subcorpuses representing materials of the Russian speech of Shor-Russian, Tatar-Russian and Khakass-Russian bilinguals. The article presents solutions developed on the basis of all subcorpuses; the illustrative contexts are drawn from the Shor-Russian subcorpus, recordings of interviews with 14 respondents, about 20 hours of sound. The recordings were made during expeditions to Shoria in 2017–2019. Bilingualism of the respondents is defined as early natural bilingualism with the dominance of the second Russian lan-guage, mother tongues are languages of the family heritage. The theoretical basis of the research was works on linguistic contact at the lexical level. Solutions based on the differentiation of lexemes fully mastered by the system of standard Russian and units with the status of borrowings from other subsystems of the national language and other languages are proposed. In the latter case, linguistic and contextual features are distin-guished that oppose lexical borrowing and code-switching. The typical errors singled out at the lexical level are: [LexId] – idiomatic expressions that are not fixed in the standard language (dialectal and vernacular, slang, etc.), they can also be Turkic calques; [LexSem] – general Russian words used in meanings different from those fixed in the normative sources; [LexSemAgr] – violations of the lexical and semantic agreement norms. The units borrowed from the mother tongue of the respondents are located on the scale of transitions from nuclear to borderline. The nuclear units marked with the [Lex] tag are dialectal units, common words, other word usage cases that are outside the standard, as well as borrowings from the Turkic languages that are not included in the dictionaries of standard Russian. On the border “to the left” are borrowings assimilated to different degrees. On the border “to the right” are non-assimilated borrowings and code-switches. The [CodeSw] marks code-switching, insertion of mother tongue elements into Russian speech. The author considers the inclusion of statements as nuclear cases of code-switching, and single lexical inclusions as transitional cases. Code-switching is evidenced by metatext and linguistic proper, primarily phonetic, indicators. There is an insignificant number of both lexical borrowings and cases of code-switching in the speech of the respondents of the RuTuBiC corpus, which depends on the type of bilingualism. The typicality of metatext marking of borrowings and code-switches is determined by the discursive, genre and thematic limitations of the corpus.

The Status of Knighthood Appointments Made by Deposed Royal Families

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shutaro Takeda
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Focal Points ◽  
Comprehensive Review ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
New Interpretation ◽  
The Right

Legal debates on the deposed sovereigns’ rights have emerged since 20th century. Among them, the right to appoint knights by heads of deposed royal families is one of the focal points. The author begins with a comprehensive review of legal debates on the subject. Six principles on the appointment are extracted from the review. Then, a new interpretation is proposed, wherein the legitimacy to confer honours and the legitimacy of the orders of knighthood themselves have to be considered separately. Under this method of interpretation, the criterion to judge the legitimacy of an appointment of knight is both the jus honorum of the head of the family and the order of knighthood itself being legitimate.

scholarly journals 器官捐獻的家庭同意原則: 儒家倫理的現代應用

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-75
Author(s):  
Mingxu WANG ◽  
Wen ZHANG ◽  
Xueliang WANG
Keyword(s):  
Organ Donation ◽  
Family Involvement ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Organ Transplant ◽  
Confucian Ethics ◽  
Next Of Kin ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Gift ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.從儒家倫理的視角解讀中國新實施的《人體器官移植條例》，以第8 條中“共同表示同意”為著力點，認為，儒家的家庭倫理不僅深刻地影響者中國人的思維方式和行為方式，而且至今被人們認為是構建家庭倫理的最根本原則，有著廣泛的社會基礎和現實根據。分析了儒家倫理支持器官捐獻的理據，結合案例指出：家庭的知情同意並不違背個人的知情同意；應當在儒家的家庭倫理的基礎上探討這一條例的相關問題，從而幫助完善和實施這一條例，使我國有關人體器官移植和屍體捐獻的立法更加完備，為推動器官移植技術的發展建立更為有效的法律保障機制。並提出在在條例實施過程中還有五個相關問題需要澄清和解決。Organ donation is the gift of an organ to help someone else who needs a transplant. Hundreds of people’s lives are saved each year by organ transplants. Yet the question remains: Who should give the priority in terms of donation procedures - the individual who feels a strong, personal commitment to offer his/her organ or the legal next-of-kin, i.e., the priority order of the family members? This has been greatly debated bioethical issue in China in recent years. Rather than emphasizing the right of individuals to decide what will happen after they die, or removing the burden of making a decision about organ donation from families dealing with the traumatic death of a loved one, the policy of family consent indicates the signif icant role of family in making the decision. That is to say, the consent, or lack of objection, of those closest to the patient is always sought before organs can be donated. The family involvement could avoid discomfort with the process on the one hand, but also cause conf licts when there is a disagreement between the donor and family members on the other.This paper focuses its discussion on the context and impacts of the“ Rules regarding Organ Transplant” implemented in China since 2007. Then, it turns to traditional Confucian ethics to talk about the meaning of life and Confucian concept of family to show that Confucianism would support the idea of organ transplant. To prove the claim, the paper offers two recent examples of organ donation. Organ transplant should be advocated but the rules should be tighten in order to prevent unqualified doctors and profithungry hospitals from abusing patients and organ donors.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 301 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

scholarly journals 《家道與齊家工夫》書後

2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-91
Author(s):  
Wenming TANG
Keyword(s):  
Filial Piety ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Confucian Ethics ◽  
Intergenerational Relationship ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Parents And Children ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
The Family ◽  
Private And Public

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.Professor Ni’s essay on the role of the family provides insights into Confucian ethics. Here I indicate four points. First, the proper approach to understanding Confucian ethics is through virtue theory, not deontology. Second, filial piety can be used as the pretext for grabbing egoism. Third, filial piety entails an equilibrium between private and public interests. Fourth, the reconstruction of the three cardinal guides is necessary in modern society. I also point out two problems with the essay. First, the Confucian idea of marriage is based on the intergenerational relationship between parents and children, not romantic love between a man and a woman. Second, in practice, the strategy is important but the principle is fundamental.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 44 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

scholarly journals Prosedur Pencatatan Perkawinan dan Perceraian di Negara Indonesia dan Malaysia Perspektif Hukum Islam

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-99
Author(s):  
Fahmi Basyar
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Family Law ◽  
South East Asia ◽  
Islamic World ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of ◽  
Muslim Majority ◽  
The Right

One phenomenon that emerged in the Islamic world in the 20th century is the family law renewal efforts undertaken by countries with Muslim majority. This was done in response to the dynamic development of society life. There are at least three points that is the objective of family law renewal in the Islamic world, as a law unification effort, raising the status of female, and responding to developments and demands to provide solutions to existing problems. A review of Act Number 1 in 1974 "named this law as a form of unification that is unique with respect fully the variation based on religion and belief to God, besides that unification aims to complement what is not regulated by religion, because in that matter, the state has the right to set it in accordance with the developments and the demands. From the aspect of the history of the Islamic family law renewal in South East Asia spearheaded by Malaysia. It is the first country that has been undertaking the renewal effort, with the birth of Mohammad Marriage Ordinance Number 5 in 1880 in the countries of the straits.

scholarly journals 齊家之道，要在功夫

2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-112
Author(s):  
Hongwen LI ◽  
Yali CONG
Keyword(s):  
Main Argument ◽  
Traditional Family ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
The Family ◽  
The World ◽  
Family Decision ◽  
Family Decision Making ◽  
Surrogate Decision ◽  
The Right ◽  
Family Centered

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.Professor Ni’s paper, “The Way of the Family and the Gongfu of Regulating the Family,” tells us that the right way to regulate the family, the country, and the world relies on self-cultivation. Prof. Ni’s insightful description indicates that there is a misunderstanding of “authority” and absolute obedience, and proposes a healthy way of understanding respect for authority as “helping those to grow well”. Prof. Ni is confident of the advantages of the traditional family-centered life. In response to the example regarding informed consent and family decision making, the authors comment that Professor Ni ultimately depends on the competent parent who can grasp the skill and art of “balance and right”. How, though, can we expect and rely on such a person existing? This point is the main argument of this review. The Confucian notion of family embodies many functions, including the excellent core values of “love, trust, safety, etc,” but family cannot hold the responsibility for everything, including totally surrogate decision making.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 37 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document