家事紛爭における司法の役割 -紛爭解決を通じた規範形成-

井上匡子 ( Inoue Masako ) 아세아여성법학연구소 2016 아세아여성법학 Vol.19 No.-

家族が複數の人間からなる團體である以上、その間にもめごとは當然生ずる。それらは典型的には、離婚裁判や相續紛爭のように、民事手續を通じて解決される。また現代的な問題として、ドメスティック·バイオレンスやスト一カ一などのように、警察が取り締まるべき犯罪や、各種の福祉的·行政的な手續を講ずることが要請されることも多い。さらに、グロ一バル化の中で家族內の紛爭も國際的な廣がりをみせているし、生殖補助醫療などの科學技術の進步とその普及に伴い、かつては想定されていなかった樣?な紛爭も生じている。司法や國家はこれらもめごとに關して、「法は家庭に入らず」という法諺に代表されるように、家族をプライバシ一の領域·自律的領域として介入を留保してきた。しかし同時に、國家は家族に對して、人口政策や福祉政策を通じて、積極的に介入を行ってきた。この國家と家族の間のアンビバレントな關係は、現在再檢討され、新しい司法の役割が要請されている。また、家事紛爭は、一般には家族における關係の破綻として、あるいは家族の危機の現れと捉えられることが多い。他方、價値が多樣化し、家族關係についても多樣化が進む現在においては、家事紛爭には家族の關係や家族と國家との關係をめぐる新しい規範形成の萌芽を讀み取ることができる。日本の家族法は、第二次世界大戰後歐米諸國が世界的な家族法の變革の波の中に洗われ、また日本社會も戰後の混亂期から高度成長期を經て、家族の實態が大きく變わる中にあっても、大きな改正がなされなかった。しかし、近時、判例や自治體の政策などを通じ、變化の兆しや可能性が出てきている。そこには日本型の近代家族の解體のするなか、生じてきている新しい家族像を讀みとることができる。現代型の家族紛爭は、舊來の家族像やジェンダ一構造を前提とした家族法と、現實の家族の實態や意識との間のズレや齟齬が現れたものといいうる。但し、その變化は單線的ではなく、複數の要素が絡み合っていることに注意しなければならない。本稿では、日本の家族紛爭における新しい動きとそこに見られる新しい家族觀を探る。 As families are organizations consisting of more than one person, there are naturally conflicts or disputes. They are typically resolved through civil proceedures, such as divorce trials and inheritance disputes. In addition, as a contemporary problem, it is often requested to take crime such as domestic violence or stalker, which should be cracked down by the police, and various welfare and administrative measures. Furthermore, disputes within families are spreading internationally in the globalization, and along with the advancement and spread of science and technology such as artificial insemination or external fertilization, various disputes that were not previously assumed. The judicial system and the state have reserved interventions as a domain of privacy and autonomous domains of families, as represented by a famous legal proverb says “Law does not enter the family” with regard to these concerns. At the same time, however, the state actively intervened through families through population policy and welfare policy. The ambivalent relationship between this nation and the family is now being reconsidered and a new role of judicial system is being requested. In addition, domestic disputes are often regarded as a breakdown of relationships in families, or appearance of family crisis in many cases. In other words, it has been evaluated as negative. However, as the value diversifies and family relationships become more diversified, it is possible to appriciate such conflicts as the emergence of new norms over relationships among family member as well as between families and the state. Such disputes can positively be positioned as opportunities for improving the system on the premise of new norm consciousness. There was no major amendment to the family law of Japan, inspite of the major trend of the reform process in the Western countries in the 1960s, and the changed situations of japanese society itself from the post-war chaotic period to the high-growth period. However, in recent years, with the declining birthrate and aging population advancing rapidly, signs and possibilities of change are emerging through judicial precedents and municipal policies. We can find out the dismantling modern families in Japanese-style, and a new notion of family. Therefore, contemporary family conflicts can be said to have been a mismatch or discrepancy between family law presupposing traditional family statues and gender structure, and the realities and consciousness of real family members. However, the change is not a single line, but a plurality of elements are intertwined. In this paper, we focus on cases that can be called contemporary family disputes, and explore new movements in family conflict and new family views seen there.

DVの再加害防止と司法の新しい役割 : 期待と可能性、そして理論的課題

井上匡子 ( Inoue Masako ) 아세아여성법학회 2020 아세아여성법학 Vol.23 No.-

現在日本のDV施策は、ヨーロッパやアメリカ、そしてアジア諸国の中でも、大きく遅れをとっている。なかでも、刑事的な対応は特に遅れている。その影響は、加害者に対する刑事手続内部だけの問題ではなく、加害者の社会的な評価が定まらないことを意味しており、被害者支援の様々な場面で大きな影響をもたらしている。 日本でも、遅ればせながら、加害者プログラムの試行的実施や評価がはじまっている。しかしながら、加害責任を明確にしない手法はかえって危険性を招く可能性がある。加害者ブログラムの実施·評価にあたっては、その義務性·任意性により、4種類に区別した上で議論をすることが必要である。また、加害者プログラムは、直接働きかける相手は「加害者」でありながら、真のクライアントは「被害者」であるという構造について、十分に確認されるとともに、運用面でもそれが反映される必要がある。 本稿では、加害者対応を中心において設計され、運用されているシンガ影ールとニ役ージーランドでのDV施策の全体像を参考に、日本におけるDV再加害防止のための以下の点から理論的な課題とともに新たな方向性を探る。① 再加害防止というアプローチの意義 ② 行政·福祉との協働による司法の新しい役割: 治療的司法と問題解決裁判所の可能性と理論的課題。 Covit-19 measures are being implemented in Japan as well as in the world, putting a burden on the household, as represented by the slogan stay home. Through that, various problems are erupting. It seems that Japan is trying to survive by imposing insufficient social resources on households. For example, childcare and elderly care services. Regarding DV, which is theme of this paper, the number of consultations is increasing, and it is required to respond. On the other hand, Covit-19 clarified the gender structure in society and family and clarified the importance of essential work. It was also made clear that the labor which had been carried out as unpaid work was part of the essential work in our society. The next step must lead these issues to institutional reform. Currently, Japan's domestic violence policy is far behind in Europe, the United States, and Asian countries. Among them, the criminal response is particularly late. The negative impact is not only a problem within the criminal procedure for the perpetrator, but also means that the social evaluation of the perpetrator is uncertain and unstable. And causing serious negative effects on various aspects of victim support in community. Even in Japan, trial implementation and evaluation of perpetrator programs have begun only after a considerable delay from other countries. However, a method that does not clarify the responsibility for harm may pose a risk. In order to avoid such risk, it is necessary to distinguish between four types of discussions according to the criteria of obligatory or voluntary, when implementing and evaluating the perpetrator program. In addition, in the perpetrator program, it is necessary to fully confirm the structure that the person who directly works with is the “perpetrator” and the true client is the “victim”. In this paper, with reference to the overall picture of DV measures in Singapore and Canada, which are designed and operated with a focus on dealing with perpetrators, theoretical issues are presented from the following points to prevent DV re-perpetration in Japan. And explore new directions. (1) Significance of the approach of preventing re-harm (2) New role of judiciary in collaboration with local government and welfare system: Possibility and theoretical issues of therapeutic justice and problem-solving court.

再配分/承認の正義論と親密圈の現代的意義再論 ―公正社會の構築のために―

井上匡子 ( Inoue Masako ) 아세아여성법학연구소 2017 아세아여성법학 Vol.20 No.-

急劇な少子高齡化·財政赤字により、日本の福祉國家·社會保障制度は現在、深刻な危機に面している。その結果、社會的格差は、正規勞動と非正規勞動、都市と地方、二人親とひとり親、女性と男性など複數の要素が複雜に絡み合い、深化している。さらに、本來であれば社會的格差を是正し、公正な社會を作り出すことを目的にしている社會保障制度が、社會的な差別や排除の原因の一つになっている。 この危機を脫するためには、社會構想のレヴェルまで立ち?り、檢討しなければならない。本稿では、ナンシ一·フレイザ一の再配分/承認の議論檢討することにより、理論的な手がかりを模索する。 Currently, Japan's social security system and welfare state regime are undergoing serious challenges, because of the rapidly declining birthrate and aging population the worst level of the budget. As a result, the social disparity is intricately intertwined and deepened by multiple elements such as regular labor and irregular labor, urban and rural, two parents and one parent, women and men. In addition, the path of solution to such a complex problem is becoming more and more difficult to find in the wave of globalization and neoliberalism. Furthermore, the social security system, which is aimed at correcting social differences and disparities, is the cause of social discrimination. In order to get out of this crisis, we must return to the level of social vision and consider it. In this paper, we will explore theoretical clues by discussing on the Justivce of Redistribution/Recognition by Nancy Fraser.

家族內葛藤の特徵と法制度の新しい役割 - 司法制度におけるソ一シャルワ一ク機能の意義と課題 -

井上匡子 ( Inoue Masako ) 아세아여성법학회 2018 아세아여성법학 Vol.21 No.-

世界的な広がりをみせている#metoo運動は、これまで水面下に抑えられていた様々な葛藤が浮上し、可視化されたものと位置づけうる。 本稿では、家族内/家族成員間の紛争に焦点を当てることにより、葛藤と紛争を図式的に区別する。そして、このような葛藤を抱える社会において司法制度がソーシャルワーク機能を備えることの重要性を、Access to justiceの観点から、Vulnerable アプローチを手がかりに、再検討する。 ジェンダー化された家族内/家族成員間における紛争や葛藤ケースにおいては、一方当事者が、法制度へのアクセスが困難になっている(脆弱性vulnerability)場合が多い。したがって、脆弱性を抱える当事者を制度につなげる機能であるソーシャルワーク機能が必須となる。このような機能を司法制度の内部に、しかし機能としては独立させる形で、備えることが重要である。なぜなら、司法制度もまた制度である以上、権力構造を内包しているからである。 そのためには、以下の二点に留意し、従来の紛争解決モデルとは異なる司法制度の新しい役割·機能(ソーシャルワーク機能)を検討することが必要である。① 当事者が抱える脆弱性(vulnerability)は、個人の属性に起因するのではなく、制度に起因するものである。② ソーシャルワーク機能は、専門職が担う機能として、当該制度から独立していなければならない。 The # metoo movement showing worldwide spread can position the various conflicts that have been kept under the water surface as they emerged and visualized. In this paper, we will distinguish conflicts and disputes schematically by focusing on conflicts and disputes within families / family members. Then, in the society with such conflict, we reconsider the importance of the judicial system having social work function from the viewpoint of Access to justice. In cases of conflicts and disputes between engendered family members / family members, one party often has difficulty accessing the legal system (vulnerability) in many cases. Therefore, a social work function, which is a function to connect parties with vulnerability to institutions, is very crucial. It is important to have such functions inside the judicial system, but as independent functions. This is because the judicial system is also an institution, because it encompasses the power structure. To that end, paying attention to the following two points, it is necessary to consider the new role / function (social work function) of the judicial system different from the conventional dispute resolution model. ① The vulnerability of the parties is not attributable to individual attributes, but is attributable to the institution. ② The social work function must be independent from the system as a function of professionals.

<심포지엄 특집> 고령화 사회와 법 : 케어 윤리의 의의와 가능성 -사회구상의 핵심 개념 확립을 위해서-

정상광자 ( Inoue,Masako ) 아세아여성법학연구소 2014 아세아여성법학 Vol.17 No.-

케어 윤리는 1882년에 발달심리학자 C. 길리건이 그의 주요 저서 『다른목소리로: 심리이론과 여성의 발달』1)에서 도덕적 딜레마에 직면한 소녀와젊은 여성의 도덕 판단·의사결정 과정의 경험적 분석을 통해 도덕 판단의 ‘또 하나’의 양식으로 제시되었다. 길리건은 L.콜버그의 공정한 논리적 추론을 중심으로 한 도덕발달 이론을 정의윤리라고 부르고, 거기에 포함되어 있는 젠더 바이어스를 고발했다. 그리고 ‘케어 윤리’라고 명명한 ‘또 하나’의목소리가 공정한 논리추론(정의윤리)에 의해 완전히 지워졌으며, 혹은 한단계 열등한 것으로 간주되어 왔음을 지적했다. 길리건이 제시한 ‘케어 윤리’는 남성을 중심으로 하는 사회규범에 대한 되물음으로 젠더론이나 페미니즘은 물론, 윤리학, 사회학, 정치철학, 법학 등의 폭넓은 분야에 영향을 미쳤다. 길리건의 비판은 콜버그에게만 향하고 있는 것이 아니라, 프로이트나 피아제 등 다른 실증적이라 칭해지는 연구 안에 숨어있는 젠더 바이어스나차별구조에 대한 고발이 포함되어 있으며, 젠더론의 전개나 사회이론으로서의 의의의 관점에서도 중요하다. 더욱더 중요한 점은 구체적인 인간관계의 차이나, 그 결과 발생하는 서열화와 권력관계 등에 주목하는 케어 윤리가 현재 주류인 리버럴리즘의 사회구상을 넘어, 보다 공정한 사회정의 구상과 실현에 관해 그 가능성과 의의를 지닌다는 점이다. 리버럴리즘의 공사 이원론에 근거한 제도론·사회구상에 있어서는 이러한 서열화가 전제되어 있으며, 서열화와 권력관계에서 발생하는 여러 문제가 충분히 거론되지 않아 서열 관계를 온존하거나 강화해 버렸기 때문이다. 케어 윤리는 사회이론의 핵심 개념으로 바람직한 인간상의 제시로도 중요한 의의를 지닌다.2) 그러나 현재 케어 윤리는 가족으로 대표되는 특수한 인간관계에 타당한 사적인 윤리로 주로 이해되고 있다. 혹은 기껏해야 간호 및 케어링이나 케어 노동영역에서만 한정되는 윤리로 평가되고 있을 뿐이다. 현재 일본에서 케어의 윤리는 사회구상의 핵심 개념으로는 작동하고 있지 않다. 본고에서는 케어 윤리가 사회이론의 핵심 개념으로 기능할 수 있도록, 정리 또는 극복해야 할 과제로 다음의 두 가지를 지적하고, 젠더론의 관점에서 공사 이원론 비판의 단서로 공사 이원론을 단순히 제도론적 관점에서 벗어나 주체론적 관점에서도 비판적으로 검토한다. 1. 케어 윤리와 본질주의와의 관계정리 2. 케어 윤리의 영역 한정성 시비와 정의 윤리와의 관계정리. Ethics of care is the concept that C. Gilligan as developmental psychologist has been presented in the definitive work “ In a Different Voice”1) in 1982. Gilligan, by the empirical analysis of the developmental psychology of the face of moral dilemma girls and young women of moral judgment and decision making process experiment, she found a “another” and “different” voice of women and called it Different Voice. And she criticized to ethics of justice by L. Kohlberg and his development theory as the mainstream which is centered on the fair logical reasoning, that it implies the gender bias, and has been assumed ethics of care as inferior one stage. Ethics of care as a rethinking of the social norms, has the impact on the broad range of fields, ethics, sociology, political philosophy, and jurisprudence, as well as gender theory and feminism. Also in Japan, the ethics of care had a major impact both the practice and the theoretical. A lot of feminists had much interests on it. But evaluation for it was controversial rather than simple. In one hand, ecological feminists based on the difference appreciated it, because it gave the named to the voice or emotion of women that have not been conceptualized. Moreover based on the scientific method of developmental psychology analysis, it asserted that female voice as moral judgment is not inferior to men’s voice, but equivalent which is based on a different philosophy. In the other hand, liberal feminism and radical feminism submitted critical evaluation. Because ethics of care occurs that women are exclusively tied to caring activities, and reinforces the traditional gender stereotypes in Japan. In spite that she clearly charged against gender bias, they criticized on it. Unfortunately, this twisted point had not been solved or digested on the discussions among various feminisms in the 1980s Japan. It is much more important that criticism of Gilligan rather than being directed only to Kohlberg, and gender bias such as Freud and Piaget, that is called as empirical research were included accusations of discrimination to the structure. The purpose of this essay is to point out the significances of the ethics of care as key concept of social theory for our days, at same time the problems to solve. Ethics of care, has only been considered to be a valid theory in special human relationships such as caring, care work, and family or intimate sphere. But ethics of care has significance and potentiality as the key concept of social theory. That it should not be to limit the adaptation range to “care relationship” or “care of the place”. Rather, in a relationship that also includes so-called civil society, the ethics of care is important as an idea. In order to function it as the key concept of social theory, I want to give the following two points, referring the discussion on Domestic Violence case organizing of the relationship between ethics and the essentialism of care.