從義務到權利：新舊母性主義下母性保護制度的轉向與重構

From Duty to Right: The Transformation and Reconstruction of Maternity Protection under Old and New Maternalism

母性保護制度是基於懷孕生育而對女性勞工予以保護的制度，歷史悠久，但也備受爭論，其最主要的爭議之一是平等問題：母性保護制度究竟是保護女性，或構成性別歧視？母性保護制度所表達的母性主義思維，是提升母性作為女性差異的價值與地位，或本質化母性與女性的連結、並使女性臣屬化？本文首先說明母性保護制度與母性主義的關聯、女性主義法學理論的不同母職與平等觀以及母性保護制度的三大爭議（懷孕歧視是否構成性別歧視、保護性立法的可允許性、育兒與母職建構），接著從實質平等的觀點出發，以女性夜間工作之禁止（性別特定的消極限制）與職場育兒制度（性別中立的福利／權利的積極提供）為例，探討臺灣母性保護制度與母性主義從「將母職視為義務」到「將母職視為權利」的歷史轉型，指出在義務中心的舊母性主義之下，放寬女性夜間工作是為了國家經濟發展的利益並兼顧女性的母職義務，育兒需求並不受到重視；在新母性主義的權利轉向之下，權利論述影響了女性夜間工作的進一步放寬以及性別中立的職場育兒制度之建立，母職成為一種應被保障且被鼓勵的權利。然而，從義務到權利的轉型沒有真正廢除將女人與母職連結的思考，也未能促成實質平等，而是以權利的語彙將之更新為表面上個人化的選擇與偏好。女人仍舊被鼓勵當母親、且是不平等的母親，因為育兒「選擇」是高度階級化、性別化與家庭化的。因此，本文主張揚棄母性主義與鞏固母職差異的母性保護制度，讓女人不再是「國」「家」的母親，而是平等的女性公民。

This research is a feminist investigation and a critique of maternity protection from the perspective of substantive equality. Usually defined as law and policies aiming at protecting women workers, maternity protection has a long history but is subject to various contestations. One of the most debated issues is a question regarding equality: does maternity protection constitute a form of protection for women, or serve as a form of gender discrimination? Does the idea of maternalism underlining maternity protection rightfully affirms women’s differences, or does it function to essentialize the connection between women and motherhood? The discussion begins with an introduction of maternity protection and maternalism, feminist critique of motherhood and three major issues regarding maternity protection: pregnancy discrimination as gender discrimination, the permissibility of protective legislation, and the relationship between childcare and the construction of ideal motherhood. Focusing on the the legal regulation of women’s night work and of childcare in the workplace, the research reveals the transformation of maternalism from duty-centered “old maternalism” to right-oriented “new maternalism.” The restriction on women’s night work was loosened first in the name of national interest (economic development) and then in the names of national interests and women’s right to work. The needs for child care were first largely ignored and then recognized as workers’ gender-neutral right. However, this transformation from duty to right does not create equal citizenship for women, because the “choice” to perform motherhood is an encouraged one and care work is still highly gendered, classified and familized