Social parents and social upbringing of a child in legal discourse
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2023.217Abstract
The article presents the author’s judgments about such a “manifest” concept for the family legal reality as social parents. In the status of a theoretical construction, it is often included in legal discourse, but the sign of sociality accompanying it is deprived of proper analysis by family law science. Interpreting sociality in the context of social reality, each author sees in it his own hypothesis of social (kinship, parent, child rearing). This approach has led to a significant scientific omission, concluded in the fact that the child-parent branch of family law includes counterterrorism, which has no connection and an understandable relationship with the concept of “persons recognized by parents at the direction of the law”. The correlation of the concept of “social parents” with such concepts of this series looks no less vague: the rights and obligations of parents; persons replacing parents; other persons in whose care the child is. The conclusions of the article reflect the author’s scientific views on the problem posed by him and consist in the following: the presence of obvious social grounds for the introduction of new parental concepts into the space of family law should not harm the academic maxim about the inadmissibility of separating existing legislation. Following the goal of strengthening its integrity and internal logic, the doctrine will have to identify social parents in the space of law not only from the standpoint of the usefulness of their social role, but also in the sense of correlation with already known normative constructions; scientific success in cognizing the semantic essence of the theoretical construction “social parents” can be achieved provided that cognition is not organized as an autonomous problem that exists “by itself ”, but in connection with the existing legal knowledge about parents “by law”; in the doctrinal construction of “social parents”, a significant theoretical resource is reserved, which is able to make such latent legal concepts as the actual father/mother, stepfather/stepmother, and actual educator scientifically relevant.
Keywords:
sociality in law, social parenthood, theoretical construction, the state of actual parenthood, stepparents, the actual upbringing of a child
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Библиография
Агарков, Михаил М. 2002. «Ценность частного права». Агарков, Михаил М. Избранные труды по гражданскому праву. В 2 т., т. 1, 42–105. М.: Центр ЮрИнфоР.
Белинская, Дина В. 2013. «Некоторые аспекты социального конструирования семьи и родительства». Актуальные проблемы родительства в России. Отв. ред. Татьяна А. Гурко, 139–150. М.: Институт социологии Российской академии наук.
Бобров, Виктор В. 2005. Социальное развитие: сущность, условия и критерии устойчивости. Новосибирск: Институт философии и права Сибирского отделения Российской академии наук.
Елисеев, Николай Г., Александр Л. Маковский, Т. Ф. Яковлева, ред. 2004. Гражданское уложение Германии. Вводный закон к Гражданскому уложению = Deutschen Burgerliches Gesetzbuch mit Einfuhrungsgesets. Пер. с нем. М.: Волтерс Клувер.
Карапетов, Артем Г. 2020. Основные положения гражданского права: постатейный комментарий к ст. 1–16.1 Гражданского кодекса Российской Федерации. М.: М-Логос.
Манхейм, Карл. 1994. Диагноз нашего времени. Пер. с нем. и англ. М.: Юрист.
Михеева, Лидия Ю. 2020. «Перспективы развития семейного права на рубеже десятилетий». Семейное и жилищное право 3: 3–5.
Нечаева, Александра М. 2015. «Семейный кодекс — путь к переменам». Российская юстиция 3: 14–18.
Панов, Андрей М., Евдокия И. Холостова, ред. 1997. Российская энциклопедия социальной работы. В 2 т., т. 1. М.: Институт социальной работы.
Покровский, Иосиф А. 1998. Основные проблемы гражданского права. М.: Статут.
Суханов, Евгений. А. 2020. «Социальное лицо гражданского права (к постановке вопроса)». Гражданское право социального государства: Сб. ст., посвященный 90-летию со дня рождения профессора А. Л. Маковского (1930–2020). Отв. ред. Василий В. Витрянский, Евгений А. Суханов, 24–37. М.: Статут.
Тарусина, Надежда Н. 2020. «Семейному кодексу РФ — 25 лет: состояние здоровья и пути его улучшения». Социально-юридическая тетрадь 10: 38–51.
Тиммерманс, Вим. 2013. «Гражданский кодекс Нидерландов». Вестник международного коммерческого арбитража 1 (7): 254–292.
Усачева, Елена А. 2019. «Социальное отцовство (материнство): постановка проблемы». Российский юридический журнал 6: 115–120.
Хазова, Ольга. А. 2022. “Понятие социального родительства в контексте российского семейного права”. Закон 1: 77–86.
Чернова, Жанна В. 2012. «Семейная политика в западноевропейских странах. Модели отцовства». Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии 15 (1): 103–122.
Шахова, Елена С. 2016. «Соотношение родительских и усыновительских правоотношений: актуальные проблемы семейного права». Актуальные проблемы российского права 7: 75–81.
Arendell, Terry. 2000. “Conceiving and investigating motherhood: The decade’s scholarship”. Journal of Marriage and Family 4: 1192–1207.
Dethloff, Nina, Timmermann, Anja. 2017. “Multiple Elternschaft — Familienrecht und Familienleben im Spannungsverhältnis”. Familien mit multipler Elternschaft Entstehungszusammenhänge, Herausforderungen und Potenziale. Hrsg. Pia Bergold Andrea Buschner, Birgit Mayer-Lewis, Tanja Mühling, 173–195. Berlin; Toronto: Verlag Barbara Budrich Opladen.
Douglas, James, Richard Banks, Joanna Grossman. 2021. Family law in a changing America. New York: Walters Kluwer.
Edwards, Rosalind, McCarthy J. Ribbens, Val Gillies. 1999. “Biological parents and social families: Legal discourses and everyday understandings of the position of step-parents”. International Journal of Law, Poliсy and The Family 13: 78–105.
Eriksson, Anders, Аke Saldeen, 1993. “Parenthood and science — establishing and contesting parentage”. Parenthood in modern society: Legal and Social issues for the twenty-first century. Ed. by John Eekelaar, Petar Sarcevic, 75–92. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publ.
Gabriel, Thomas, Samuel Keller. 2020. “Soziale Elternschaft und soziale Zugehörigkeit. Reflexionen der Zürcher Adoptionsstudie”. Journal of Pedagogical Sciences 23: 295–322.
Grossman, Joanna L. 2017. “Constitutional parentage”. Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of Law Legal Studies 32 (2): 307–340.
Jurczyk, Karin. 2017. “Elternschaftliches Neuland”. DJI Impulse 4. Дата обращения 22 ноября, 2022. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321301850_Soziale_Elternschaft_gestalten.
Lenz, Karl. 2013. “Was ist eine Familie? Konturen eines universalen Familienbegriffs”. Familie(n) heute. Entwicklungen, Kont-roversen, Prognosen. Hrsg. Dorothea K. Krüger, Holger Herma und Anja Schierbaum, 104–125. Weinheim; Basel: Beltz Juventa.
Sanders, Anne. 2018. Mehrelternschaft. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Scheiwe, Kirsten. 2016. “Mehr als nur zwei Sorgeberechtigte? Mehrelternsorge und soziale Elternschaft in England und Wales und in den Niederlanden aus rechtsvergleichender Perspektive”. Recht der Jugend und des Bildungswesens (RdJB) 64 (2): 227–240.
Schwab, Diter. 2016. “Fragen zwischen Sozial — und Reschtswissenschaften”. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung 28 (2): 208–220.
Steiner, Eva. 2006. “The tensions between legal, biological and social conceptions of parenthood in English law”. Electronic Journal of Comparative Law. Дата обращения 20 марта, 2023. https://studylib.net/doc/7657461/tensions-between-legal--biological-and-social-conceptions-of.
Strauss, Greg. 2019. “What role remains for de facto parenthood”. Florida State University Law Review 46 (4): 909–977. Дата обращения 20 марта, 2023. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/What-Role-Remains-for-De-Facto-Parenthood-Strauss/bdbcffbb144fdfe65e84781717fc69a5b74e592f.
Vaskovics, Laszlo A. 2020. “Soziale Elternschaft”. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 23: 269–293.
References
Agarkov, Mikhail M. 2002. “The value of private law”. Agarkov, Mikhail M. Izbrannye trudy po grazhdanskomu pravu. In 2 vols, vol. 1, 42–105. Moscow, Tsentr IurInfoR Publ. (In Russian)
Arendell, Terry. 2000. “Conceiving and investigating motherhood: The decade’s scholarship”. Journal of Marriage and Family 4: 1192–1207.
Belinskaia, Dina V. 2013. “Some aspects of the social construction of family and parenthood”. Aktual’nye problemy roditel’stva v Rossii. Ed. by Tatiana A. Gurko, 139–150. Moscow, Institut sotsiologii Rossiiskoi akademii nauk Publ. (In Russian)
Bobrov, Viktor V. 2005. Social development: the essence, conditions and criteria of sustainability. Novosibirsk, Institut filosofii i prava Sibirskogo otdeleniia Rossiiskoi akademii nauk Publ. (In Russian)
Chernova, Zhanna V. 2012. “Family policy in Western European countries. Models of fatherhood”. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noi antropologii 15 (1): 103–122. (In Russian)
Dethloff, Nina, Timmermann, Anja. 2017. “Multiple Elternschaft — Familienrecht und Familienleben im Spannungsverhältnis”. Familien mit multipler Elternschaft Entstehungszusammenhänge, Herausforderungen und Potenziale. Hrsg. Pia Bergold Andrea Buschner, Birgit Mayer-Lewis, Tanja Mühling, 173–195. Berlin; Toronto, Verlag Barbara Budrich Opladen.
Douglas, James, Richard Banks, Joanna Grossman. 2021. Family law in a changing America. New York, Walters Kluwer.
Edwards, Rosalind, McCarthy J. Ribbens, Val Gillies. 1999. “Biological parents and social families: Legal discourses and everyday understandings of the position of step-parents”. International Journal of Law, Poliсy and The Family 13: 78–105.
Eliseev, Nikolai G., Alexander L. Makovsky, T. F. Yakovleva, eds. 2004. German Civil Code. Introductory Law to the Civil Code = Deutschen Burgerliches Gesetzbuch mit Einfuhrungsgesets. Rus. ed. Moscow, Wolters Kluwer Publ.(In Russian)
Eriksson, Anders, Аke Saldeen, 1993. “Parenthood and science — establishing and contesting parentage”. Parenthood in modern society: Legal and Social issues for the twenty-first century. Ed. by John Eekelaar, Petar Sarcevic, 75–92. Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff Publ.
Gabriel, Thomas, Samuel Keller. 2020. “Soziale Elternschaft und soziale Zugehörigkeit. Reflexionen der Zürcher Adoptionsstudie”. Journal of Pedagogical Sciences 23: 295–322.
Grossman, Joanna L. 2017. “Constitutional parentage”. Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of Law Legal Studies 32 (2): 307–340.
Jurczyk, Karin. 2017. “Elternschaftliches Neuland”. DJI Impulse 4. Accessed November 22, 2022. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321301850_Soziale_Elternschaft_gestalten.
Karapetov, Artem G. 2020. The main provisions of civil law: Article-by-article commentary to Articles 1–16.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Moscow, M-Logos Publ. (In Russian)
Khazova, Olga A. 2022. “The concept of social parenthood in the context of Russian family law”. Zakon 1: 77–86. (In Russian)
Lenz, Karl. 2013. “Was ist eine Familie? Konturen eines universalen Familienbegriffs”. Familie(n) heute. Entwicklungen, Kont-roversen, Prognosen. Hrsg. Dorothea K. Krüger, Holger Herma und Anja Schierbaum, 104–125. Weinheim; Basel, Beltz Juventa.
Manheim, Karl. 1994. The diagnosis of our time. Rus. ed. Moscow, Iurist Publ. (In Russian)
Mikheeva, Lidiia Iu. 2020. “Prospects for the development of family law at the turn of decades”. Semeinoe i zhilishchnoe pravo 3: 3–5. (In Russian)
Nechaeva, Aleksandra M. 2015. “The Family Code is the way to change”. Rossiyskaia iustitsiia 3: 14–18. (In Russian)
Panov, Andrei М., Evdokiia И. Kholostova, eds. 1997. Russian Encyclopedia of Social Work. In 2 vols, vol. 1. Moscow, Institut sotsial’noi raboty Publ. (In Russian)
Pokrovskii, Iosif A. 1998. The main problems of civil law. Moscow, Statut Publ. (In Russian)
Sanders, Anne. 2018. Mehrelternschaft. Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck.
Sukhanov, Evgenii. A. 2020. “Social person of civil law (to raise the question)”. Grazhdanskoe pravo sotsial’nogo gosudarstva: Collection of articles, the 90th anniversary of the birth of A. L. Makovsky (1930–2020). Ed. by Vasilii V. Vitrianskii, Evgenii A. Sukhanov, 24–37. Moscow, Statut Publ. (In Russian)
Scheiwe, Kirsten. 2016. “Mehr als nur zwei Sorgeberechtigte? Mehrelternsorge und soziale Elternschaft in England und Wales und in den Niederlanden aus rechtsvergleichender Perspektive”. Recht der Jugend und des Bildungswesens (RdJB) 64 (2): 227–240.
Schwab, Diter. 2016. “Fragen zwischen Sozial — und Reschtswissenschaften”. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung 28 (2): 208–220.
Shakhova, Elena S. 2016. “The ratio of parental and adoptive legal relations: Actual problems of family law”. Aktual’nye problemy rossiiskogo prava 7: 75–81. (In Russian)
Steiner, Eva. 2006. “The tensions between legal, biological and social conceptions of parenthood in English law”. Electronic Journal of Comparative Law. Дата обращения 20 марта, 2023. https://studylib.net/doc/7657461/tensions-between-legal--biological-and-social-conceptions-of.
Strauss, Greg. 2019. “What role remains for de facto parenthood”. Florida State University Law Review 46 (4): 909–977. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/What-Role-Remains-for-De-Facto-Parenthood-Strauss/bdbcffbb144fdfe65e84781717fc69a5b74e592f.
Tarusina, Nadezhda N. 2020. “The Family Code of the Russian Federation is 25 years old: The state of health and ways to improve it”. Sotsial’no-iuridicheskaia tetrad’ 10: 38–51. (In Russian)
Timmermans, Wim. 2013. “Dutch Civil Code.” Vestnik mezhdunarodnogo kommercheskogo arbitrazha 1 (7): 254–292. (In Russian)
Usacheva, Elena A. 2019. “Social fatherhood (motherhood): Problem statement”. Rossiiskii iuridicheskii zhurnal 6: 115–120. (In Russian)
Vaskovics, Laszlo A. 2020. “Soziale Elternschaft”. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 23: 269–293.
Downloads
Published
2023-05-11
How to Cite
Komissarova, E. G. (2023). Social parents and social upbringing of a child in legal discourse. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law, 14(2), 542–559. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2023.217
Issue
Section
Legal Life: Scientific-Practical Conclusions, Comments and Reviews
License
Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
