婚姻事件裁判之性別研究——以花蓮地區離婚判決為例

Gender Study of Judgments in Marriage Cases -Examples of Divorce Judgments in Hualien District

系所名稱：課程設計與潛能開發學系 學位別：碩士 畢業學年：103年 指導教授：王采薇 本研究以2005年司法機關開始推動性別主流化政策前後為判決文本觀察期間，選取台灣花蓮地方法院94年、97年及99之婚姻裁判中「離婚」案件作為研究文本進行婚姻事件裁判之性別研究。在研究方法上以女性主義法學及多元文化理論為立論基礎，透過文本論述分析及深入訪談方式，分析判決文本中之性別圖像、性別文化特徵及家事法庭法官對於婚姻事件審理的性別意識。研究發現：第一，花蓮地區婚姻事件裁判性別圖像特徵為：（一）法的形式意義優先於實質判准意識；（二）審理性別價值觀建構於婚姻制度與家庭倫理的不可分性；（三）性別權利審理意識以平等原則為主，差異原則為例外；（四）家事法庭逐漸呈現以女性法官為主的司法審理環境。第二，花蓮地區婚姻事件裁判性別文化特徵包括：（一）性別刻板文化仍是制度性的主流審理意識；（二）當事人之性別人格權逐漸為家事法庭所重視；（三）家事事件判決趨向多元化的發展；（四）司法專業主義仍優先於社會情感；（五）判決缺乏對於族群、性別與階級的特殊性觀照；（六）94年判決重視性別權利的共同性，婚姻身分的不可分割性，97年判決開始融入婚姻的公共性及契約性，強調性別平權的重要，99年判決強調個人的生存價值及多元文化的尊重。第三，法官審理之性別意識脈絡途徑分別為：（一）經驗性途徑：法官雖依法審判，但面對家事婚姻事件仍會思考自我或社會上的生活經驗，建構部分審理意識型態。（二）制度性途徑：法官面對修正後的新法令如何理解詮釋依法仍獨立審判。（三）社會性途徑：部分法官的性別意識非自體制發展而是受到社會力影響。（四）反身性途徑：法官仍企圖與社會對話及自我反思性別正義的價值。（五）教育性途徑：法官審理案件確實存有社會知識不足的盲點，且針對開設法律專業以外科目、研習制度、專業法官證照設計等制度仍有批判聲音，惟就性別主流化相關研習法官們仍給予正面肯定。

This study covers the period of judgment observation before and after the Gender Mainstreaming Policy implemented by the judiciary in 2005. It selects divorce cases handled by the Taiwan Hualien District Court in 2005, 2008 and 2010 as the research topic in the gender study of judgments in marriage cases. This study applies the Feminist Jurisprudence and Multicultural Theory as research method and theoretical foundation, which analyzes gender image, gender culture characteristics and gender consciousness of the Family Court judges with regard to judgment in marriage cases by undertaking discourse analysis and in-depth interviews. The findings are as follows:First, the gender image characteristics of judgment in marriage cases handled by the Hualien District court involve: (1) the formal interpretation of law precedes substantive criteria consciousness; (2) trial gender values are based on the inseparable connection between the marriage system and family ethics; (3) consciousness of gender rights considers equality as the main principle and difference as an exceptional principle; and (4) there are a growing number of female judges in the Family Court.Secondly, the gender culture characteristics of judgment in marriage cases handled by the Hualien District court include: (1) gender stereotype is still the institutional mainstream consciousness; (2) gender and personality rights of parties involved are slowly gaining the Family Court’s attention; (3) Judgments in family matters point to diversity; (4) judicial professionalism still precedes social emotions; (5) there is lack of attention to judgments pertaining to ethnic groups, gender and class; and (6) judgment in 2005 focused more on intercommunity relations in connection with gender rights as well as inalienability rights concerning marriage and identity. In 2008, publicity and contractual nature of marriage were integrated and gender equality was emphasized. In 2010, the importance of personal survival and respect for multiculturalism were promoted.Thirdly, gender-consciousness and approaches to bench trials specify: (1) Empirical Approach: Although a judge hears a case in accordance with the law, he/she is still influenced by the ideology as he/she considers his/her social/life experience when handling family or marriage cases. (2) Systematic Approach: Interpreting and explaining new revised decrees. (3) Social Approach: The gender consciousness of some judges is influenced by social forces rather than system development. (4) Reflective Approach: Judges tend to rely on public opinion and reflect on the value of gender justice. (5) Educational Approach: Judges may have insufficient social knowledge when hearing cases. There are still criticisms for systems such as setting subjects except the legal profession, study system, certification and the license design for professional judges, etc. Judges who address the issue of gender mainstreaming are viewed positively.