Parental Responsibility

In his dictum within the case of Hewer v Bryant , Lord Denning stated that the law surrounding children’s rights “can, and should, keep pace with the time ”. Denning criticised the late Victorian era case of Re Agar-Ellis  where it was held that a parent’s absolute authority over their children continued unabated until the age of majority. These comments resurfaced in the prominent case of Gillick  where the House of Lords established that a child’s capacity to make important medical decisions depended not on a legally set age but rather their individual level of maturity and understanding. This essay argues that post Hewer, Gillick and the implementation of the Human Rights Act , the UK has seen an increasingly contentious relationship between the concepts of parental responsibility and child autonomy at law. It is contended that the concepts are not inter-dependent but rather exist theoretically and practically opposed as competing and contextually qualified interests. This will be contended on the basis that the rights inherent within parental responsibility naturally conflict with a full conception of autonomy and represent instead a publicly endorsed paternalism toward children. Further, it is argued that both concepts are often used as judicial rhetoric in combination with the ‘welfare principle’ in order to impose judicial, value based, policy judgements; a precarious practice. It will be shown this is most apparent in the logically incoherent concept of ‘Gillick competency’  in relation to refusal of treatment.

Ten years have already passed since Brussels II bis Regulation entered into force. Along these years, the EU institutions, and especially the ECJ, have developed an important task in the interpretation and application of this instrument. By means of an analysis of this development, this paper is directed to contribute to the reflection on some of the issues that are currently under consideration ahead of a possible reform of the Regulation, and also to draw attention to other issues that are not being considered. For reasons of limited space, whole consideration is given to the rules on international jurisdiction.

Abstract

In its Judgment of 16 January 2019 (in Case C-386/17) the European Court of Justice ruled that the rules of lis pendens in Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC) Nº 44/2001 and Article 19 of Council Regulation (EC) Nº 2201/2003 had to be interpreted as meaning that where, in a dispute in matrimonial matters, parental responsibility or maintenance obligations, the court second seized, in breach of those rules, delivers a judgment which becomes final, those articles preclude the courts of the Member State in which the court first seized is situated from refusing to recognize that judgment solely for that reason. In particular, that breach cannot, in itself, justify non-recognition of a judgment on the ground that it is manifestly contrary to public policy in that Member State.

This comment basically agrees with the ECJ, though pointing out some weakness or not completely right arguments in its reasoning.

Los trabajos aquí contenidos dan cuenta, en consecuencia, de una suerte
de desplazamiento progresivo del eje de las relaciones parento-filiales:
desde la potestad o poder paterno, hacia el ejercicio equitativo y permanente —entre padres y madres— de una responsabilidad específica por el cuidado y bienestar integral de sus hijos e hijas. Este desplazamiento
consolida una tendencia, ya de larga data, respecto a la disminución y
recomprensión de los antiguos poderes omnímodos concedidos históricamente al padre sobre sus hijos.

Alice sued John on the grounds that sometime in 2006 Alice met John with whom she fashioned a romantic relationship. Thereafter in 2008, John relocated to Europe for employment. In 2009 Alice had a baby with another man while John was away in Europe. That, nevertheless, John supported the child by sending money via MPESA intended for rent and school fees. Sometime later they broke up hence her claim that John had assumed parental responsibility of the child and sought to move the court to make a declaration that John was duty bound to discharge his parental responsibility towards the minor’s maintenance, this despite the breakup.
The above was the scenario akin to the case of SWK v RNK 2019 (Civil Appeal 47 of 2018). I recon what rings in our minds right now is the query: What is parental responsibility and who bares it? Okay, join me in this journey as we attempt to debunk it

Esta propuesta busca identificar tales limitaciones y sugerir avenidas para el reconocimiento y  protección de los derechos constitucionales de la niñez, de un modo coherente con los compromisos internacionales de Chile en materia de derechos humanos. En particular, se sugieren dos cuestiones fundamentales. Primero, que será necesario prestar atención a distintas formas de protección constitucional indirecta de los derechos de la niñez. Esto es, cláusulas constitucionales que, aun cuando no se redacten exclusiva y directamente para la protección de los derechos de la niñez, tendrán efectos importantes en su interpretación (por ejemplo: derecho a educación, derecho a la salud, derecho a la identidad, derecho a la igualdad y la no-discriminación, derecho a la vida familiar y/o derechos parentales). Segundo, se indica la necesidad de avanzar en formas de protección constitucional directa de los derechos de la niñez y su prioridad. Tal protección directa, a su vez, debiera reconocer tres tipos o categorías de derechos o intereses constitucionales de la niñez: a) derechos orientados a garantizar, de forma prioritaria, la vida y el pleno desarrollo de las niñas, niños y adolescentes, b) derechos reconocidos para asegurar la protección efectiva de la niñez frente a diversas formas de violencia y discriminación y, c) derechos que permitan garantizar los intereses de autonomía y participación de niñas, niñas y adolescentes, de conformidad con su edad y madurez.

RESUMEN:
La salida efectiva del Reino Unido de la Unión Europea conlleva significativas consecuencias desde la perspectiva del Derecho internacional privado. En el presente estudio se analizan éstas en relación con algunas cuestiones del Derecho internacional privado europeo de familia, en particular respecto de la competencia judicial internacional y el reconocimiento y ejecución de decisiones en los futuros litigios transfronterizos europeos en materia matrimonial, responsabilidad parental y alimentos. Una de las consecuencias más significativas del cambio de condición del Reino Unido de Estado Miembro a tercer Estado es que perderá la libertad de circulación de las resoluciones emanadas de sus órganos judiciales, pues ya no gozarán de la exención de execuátur para su ejecución material fuera de su jurisdicción. No obstante, las negociaciones entre el Reino Unido y la UE que prevé el art. 50 del TUE podrían modificar esta situación.

ABSTRACT: The UK withdrawal from the EU will involve significant consequences from PIL perspective. This paper addresses the consequences in family matters, in particular regarding jurisdiction, recognition, and execution issues in matrimonial and parental responsibility matters together with maintenance obligations. For the UK, one of the most relevant consequences of becoming a third Estate is that EU Member States will not be compelled to recognize decisions adopted by the UK courts through the European PIL instruments. However, negotiations between the UK and the EU, as established by art. 50 TEU, could modify this natural consequence.

El art. 10 del Reglamento 2019/1111 supedita la elección de foro en materia de responsabilidad parental al cumplimiento de una serie de condiciones, que son objeto de análisis en este trabajo: el menor debe estar estrechamente relacionado con el Estados miembro, cuyos órganos jurisdiccionales son elegidos, en especial por alguna de las circunstancias que se enumeran en el propio precepto; es necesario el acuerdo de las partes, así como de cualquier otro titular de la responsabilidad parental, que debe hacerse cumpliendo unos determinados requisitos formales y temporales; y el ejercicio de la competencia debe responder al interés superior del menor. El trabajo toma como referencia el art. 12 del Reglamento 2201/2003 y la jurisprudencia del TJUE sobre este precepto, para explicar el sentido de los cambios que se introducen. Las relaciones entre las normas de competencia judicial internacional del Reglamento 2019/1111 y del Convenio de La Haya de 1996 también son objeto de análisis en este trabajo.

A diferencia de conceptos como potestad, poder o derechos parentales, la noción de responsabilidad parental busca destacar que las niñas y los niños no son una suerte de posesión a ser controlada por sus padres o madres, sino personas con derechos
y expectativas de cuidado por parte de tales adultos. Como tal, la responsabilidad parental permite describir de mejor manera las expectativas del sistema jurídico contemporáneo en torno a las funciones parentales y el papel central de los intereses superiores de la niñez. Se trata de un marco más pertinente para regular las relaciones entre progenitores e hijos e hijas y que no resulta incoherente con el reconocimiento de facultades, autoridades y derechos de tales adultos, aunque siempre en el marco del ejercicio de dicha responsabilidad. Bajo este prisma, el juez debe siempre considerar los intereses del niño o la niña como una consideración primordial, lo que no significa desconocer el valor y la importancia esencial que ambos padres y otros adultos relevantes desempeñan para la precisión y efectivización de tales intereses superiores.

In Switzerland family law is regulated in the Swiss Civil Code that came into force in 1912. The Swiss Civil Code remained almost untouched for sixty years. Since the 1970s, however, it has been amended and reformed step by step in many different areas. This article gives an overview on the current Swiss family law as well as the recent developments and reforms. Amongst others it addresses the Swiss legal rules on marriage and divorce, unmarried cohabitation and same-sex relationships as well as the legal rules concerning children, such as parentage, adoption, parental responsibility and child support. It further briefly describes the Swiss rules on names as well as change of legal gender and concludes with some remarks about the future of Swiss family law.

1996 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-Operation In Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children” addresses a very wide range of international parental responsibility and child protection issues. Aiming to improve the protection of children in international situations and seeking to avoid conflicts between legal systems in relation to measures taken for the protection of children, Convention provides rules on jurisdiction, applicable law and recognition and enforcement in respect of parental responsibility and protection measures of children. The Convention entered into force in Turkey on 01.02.2017 and since then it became applicable under Turkish law. In this study, the possible impacts of 1996 Hague Child Protection Convention on Turkish private international law will be revealed by analyzing the scope of application, jurisdiction, conflict of law and recognition and enforcement rules of the Convention.

The aim of this article is to investigate whether techniques used for artificial reproduction safeguard or promote the future child’s welfare, and whether they are capable of offering potential future children the best possible chance for the best life, in keeping with guidelines derived from the Principle of Procreative Beneficence. This analysis will be important for discerning the parental responsibility of couples or single reproducers who plan to use or have used any of these techniques, and also for those who defend the Principle of Procreative Beneficence, which implicitly entails the use of techniques of assisted human reproduction. The paper concludes that prospective parents should be informed not only of the specific level of risk and potential damages associated with each IVF technique, but also of the fact that given the available evidence none of the standard IVF techniques can be considered to be risk free, there is reason to believe that none of these techniques can be reconciled with the responsibility of prospective parents to the promote welfare of future children and/or to offer them the best possible life

Background

The preventative paradigm of preconception care is receiving increasing attention, yet its boundaries remain vague in three respects: temporally; agentially; and instrumentally. Crucially, it remains unclear just who is to be considered a ‘potential parent’, how soon they should take up preconception responsibilities, and how weighty their responsibilities should be. 

Discussion

In this paper, we argue that a normal potential parent of reasonable prudence has a moral duty to adequately optimize the conditions under which she or his reproductive partner will conceive, though a proportionality calculus calls for toleration of several forms of preconception behavior that are non-ideal from the perspective of reproductive risk. We distinguish between five categories of potential parents to which different duties of preconception care should be ascribed. This framework is advanced to assign preconception care responsibilities with more precision than is often done in the current debate on preconception care. We conclude by applying our theoretical framework to three types of preconception care interventions: consumption of folic acid; keeping one’s weight under control; and engaging in preconception genetic screening. Our analysis shows that the literature on preconception care often glosses over crucial distinctions between different types of potential parents and uses a notion of preconception beneficence that may be overly demanding. Nevertheless, preconception moral duties will often be weighty and reluctance to accept such duties on account of the burden they impose do not warrant preconception insouciance.

Summary

To avoid misplaced responsibility ascriptions in the growing field of preconception care, distinctions must be made between different types of potential parents to whom different degrees of preconception responsibility apply. We present such a preliminary framework and bring it to bear on the cases of folic acid consumption, obesity and genetic testing.

This article considers the development and use of the law regulating the prosecution of parents under section 444 of the Education Act1996, in the broader context of legislation and policy initiatives concerned with the governance of parental responsibility. It explores the ways in which the power to prosecute parents has been used by local educational authorities (LEAs) and interpreted by the courts. The article critically analyses the manner in which the powers emphasise punishment and retribution in the context of the social moralisation of ‘flawed’ parents; pay insuffcient regard to the effects of parental responsibility laws on low-income, single parent families; represent an attempt to impose a simple solution on to a complex socio-economic problem; and amplify the scope for mothers to be made the subject of criminal justice interventions. It is argued that the prosecution of parents imposes an unfair burden on mothers and, in particular, single parent mothers.

Previous research indicates that people ascribe less responsibility to juvenile offenders than adult offenders for the crimes they have committed. Although assignment of responsibility to parents varies depending upon the youth’s age, we know little about the role of other factors. The current study used randomized factorial vignettes to examine whether the seriousness of the offense, peer involvement, and the offender's race, age, sex, and prior record influence support for parental responsibility. We found that participants in our study placed substantial responsibility on parents for dealing with juvenile offenders; however, support for punishing the parents was low, while the importance attached to enrolling parents in training was high. Views on parental responsibility were influenced by the age of the juvenile and the seriousness of the offense. The implications of these findings and how they fit in with previous work are discussed.

Resumen: En materia de responsabilidad parental, el Reglamento 2201/2003 tiene que aplicarse conjuntamente con el Convenio de La Haya de 1996, en el que la Unión Europea ha decidido participar. La coordinación de estos dos instrumentos internacionales ha resultado difícil, en relación particular-mente con las normas de competencia judicial internacional. Uno de los objetivos del nuevo Reglamento 2019/1111 ha sido solventar este problema, con la adición de un nuevo párrafo al precepto dedicado a regular las relaciones con el Convenio de La Haya del 96 (art. 61 del Reglamento 2201/2003, ahora art. 97 del Reglamento 2019/1111), que es objeto de análisis en el presente estudio. Palabras clave: Reglamento 2019/1111, Convenio Haya 1996, coordinación, normas de compe-tencia judicial internacional. Abstract: In parental responsibility issues, Regulation 2201/2203 has to be applied in conjunction with the 1996 Hague Convention, in which the European Unión has decided to participate. The coordination of these two bodies of international rules has shown to be difficult, particularly in relation with the jurisdiction rules. One of the objectives of new Regulation 2019/1111 is to solve this problem, with the addition of a new paragraph to the article dedicated to regulate the relations with the 1996 Hague Convention (art. 61 of Regulation 2201/2003, now art. 97 of Regulation 2019/1111), which is analysed in this study. Sumario: I. Introducción. II. La participación de la Unión Europea en el CH 96. III. El mar-co de relaciones entre el Reglamento (UE) 2019/1111 y el CH 96. 1. El Reglamento 2019/1111 y las relaciones con otros instrumentos internacionales. 2. Determinación del ámbito de coincidencia * Este trabajo se realiza en el marco de las actividades de la Cátedra Jean Monnet sobre derecho de familia y sucesiones en la Unión Europea (Reference number: 599094-EPP-1-ES-EPPJMO-CHAIR), de la que la autora es titular. Las opiniones y valoraciones que se realizan en el presente trabajo son de la exclusiva responsabilidad de la autora.

Legal terms contained in each Regulation have to be interpreted in an autonomous way. To this purpose Article 2 of Regulation Brussels IIbis contains a list of definitions covering most but not all of the legal terms used. However, procedural law cannot be completely dissociated from substantive law. This paper addresses the impact of substantive family law on the determination of the Regulation's scope of application. First of all, there is a relevance of the divide line between public and private law. As far as divorce issues are concerned, the new perception of marriage and the emergence of multicultural societies have to be carefully taken into account. The scope of application in relation to parental responsibility is to an important extent determined upon the basis of the new concept of family. Despite the interference of modern perceptions, it can be argued that determining the place of the child's habitual residence has led in the resurgence of traditionalist views.

In recent decades, self-control has received increasing attention as it can safeguard child-development and human wellbeing. Researchers from various disciplines – philosophy, neuroscience and social psychology – have investigated what self-control is, how it is generated and how it can be stimulated. This chapter critically reflects on recent discussions of the concept and the science of self-control while investigating their bearings on the question of whether parents have a responsibility to raise self-controlled children and what that would entail. The argument put forth is that current social psychology and neuroscience largely investigates controlled behaviour but ignores the prefix self. Consequently, a more comprehensive understanding of the term that does justice to both aspects is required. This gives rise to two different sets of educational goals. Firstly, raising self-controlled children entails teaching them strategies to overcome temptation. Secondly, it requires that parents support children to develop a self that sets its own goals, reflects on these goals and considers them as reasons for action.

In its Judgment of 27 October 2016 (In Case C 428/15) the ECJ ruled that «1. Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) Nº 2201/2003..., must be interpreted as meaning that it is applicable where a child protection application
brought under public law by the competent authority of a Member State concerns the adoption of measures
relating to parental responsibility, such as the application at issue in the main proceedings, where it is a
necessary consequence of a court of another Member State assuming jurisdiction that an authority of that other
Member State thereafter commence proceedings that are separate from those brought in the first Member State,
pursuant to its own domestic law and possibly relating to different factual circumstances.
2. Article 15(1) of Regulation Nº 2201/2003 must be interpreted as meaning that:
–in order to determine that a court of another Member State with which the child has a particular connection is
better placed, the court having jurisdiction in a Member State must be satisfied that the transfer of the case to
that other court is such as to provide genuine and specific added value to the examination of that case, taking
into account, inter alia, the rules of procedure applicable in that other Member State;
–in order to determine that such a transfer is in the best interests of the child, the court having jurisdiction in a
Member State must be satisfied, in particular, that that transfer is not liable to be detrimental to the situation of
the child.
3. Article 15(1) of Regulation Nº 2201/2003 must be interpreted as meaning that the court having jurisdiction in
a Member State must not take into account, when applying that provision in a given case relating to parental
responsibility, either the effect of a possible transfer of that case to a court of another Member State on the right
of freedom of movement of persons concerned other than the child in question, or the reason why the mother of
that child exercised that right, prior to that court being seised, unless those considerations are such that there
may be adverse repercussions on the situation of that child.»
This paper analyzes the Judgment and highlights its strengths and weaknesses. It agrees in substance with the
ECJ, but criticizes its conservatism in some of its answers, quite predictable and that do not bring a real added
value to the previous state of the matter. Likewise, it emphasizes that the wording of art. 15 of the Regulation
shows some problems of adjustment linked to the answer to the first question and proposes a reflection on the
possibility of modifying the Art. 15 in the current revision process of the Regulation.

A brief argument in favor of responsible sexual intimacy and taking parental responsibility for the children that are produced. A one-time act of making life-just like a one-time act of taking life-can trigger a lifetime of responsibilities.

Al principio dell’unicità dello status di figlio stabilito dalla legge n. 219/2012 corrisponde quello di unicità dello status di padre. Oggi, in Italia, un padre gode ex lege della piena responsabilità parentale, indipen-dentemente dall’esistenza di un rapporto matrimoniale con la madre. Benché da noi ancorata al principio di eguaglianza, tale affermazione non è però da tutti condivisa nel resto d’Europa. Numerosi paesi europei, infatti, ritengono che il minore nato fuori dal matrimonio sia in una situazione oggettivamente diversa da quella in cui si trova il figlio nato all’interno di esso, e che tale situazione giustifichi un trattamento differen-ziato della responsabilità parentale. Essi negano pertanto la responsabilità parentale ex lege del padre non sposato, prevedendone una sua (eventuale) attribuzione, successiva alla nascita del figlio, per effetto dell’accordo con la madre o del provvedimento del giudice.
Assumendo a paradigma di tale approccio l’ordinamento inglese, il presente contributo esamina la discipli-na normativa ivi vigente, soffermandosi sulla ratio sottostante e sui meccanismi predisposti per garantire la tutela della madre e l’interesse del minore. Particolare spazio verrà poi dato alla giurisprudenza della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo che, nel confermare la legittimità della scelta normativa inglese, ha definito an-che i limiti invalicabili di tale diverso trattamento, così inducendo altri ordinamenti a modificare le proprie normative interne.

This contribution addresses the role of international cooperation in determining international jurisdiction on parental responsibility and protection of children. To this study, it tackles and compares both the 1996 Hague Convention on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition, enforcement and cooperation in respect of parental responsibility and measures for the protection of children, and Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, of 27 November 2003. Particular attention is paid to the doctrine of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the latter.

Her bir AB Tuzugu’nde yer alan hukuki terimler, kendi icinde bagimsiz olarak yorumlanmalidir. Bu amacla, Bruksel IIbis Tuzugu’nun 2. maddesi, Tuzuk metninde kullanilan terimlerin hepsini olmasa da cogunlugunu kapsayacak sekilde bir tanimlar listesine yer vermistir. Bununla birlikte, usul hukuku maddi hukuktan tamamiyla bagimsiz dusunulemez. Bu makalede, Bruksel IIbis Tuzugu’nun uygulama alaninin tespitinde, aile hukukuna iliskin maddi hukuk kurallarinin etkisi incelenmistir. Oncelikle, bu mesele kamu hukuku – ozel hukuk ayrimi ile ilgilidir. Bosanmaya iliskin meseleler degerlendirilirken, evlilik kurumuna iliskin yeni bakis acilari ve cok kulturlu toplumlarin ortaya cikisi dikkatle goz onunde bulundurulmalidir. Tuzugun velayet hakkina iliskin hukumlerinin uygulama alani cok buyuk olcude yeni aile anlayisi baz alinarak belirlenmistir. Modern goruslerin mudahalelerine ragmen, cocugun mutad meskeninin neresi oldugunun tespitinde gelenekci goruslerin yeniden ortaya ciktigini ileri surme...

In mafia families children are educated to violence, revenge and to gender stereotypes. What can be done to guarantee children the right to education, the right to become citizens, the right to be men without killing and women without obeying, the right to know the value of democracy and legality? A possible answer could be the recent judgments of the juvenile Court in Reggio Calabria in which is decided the revocation of parental responsibility in all cases in which it is proved a serious injury of the child. The decadence and limitation of parental rights have this principal purpose: to allow the institutions to stop a system of behavior prejudicial to the proper development of the personality of the child and to stop this cycle that transmits negative cultural values from father to son and from mother to daughter.

W niniejszym opracowaniu dokonano analizy przepisów ustawy o zmianie imienia i nazwiska w kontekście ich spójności z Kodeksem rodzinnym i opiekuńczym oraz ewentualnej celowości wyłączenia zasady trwałości, niezmienności nazwiska dziecka w aspekcie realizacji zasady dobra dziecka i równości praw rodziców. W celu zapewnienia spójności można dokonać prostego procesu legislacyjnego, polegającego na modyfikacji przepisów w taki sposób, aby zawierały odesłanie do właściwych norm, lub  Kodeksu rodzinnego i opiekuńczego podobnie jak czyni to P.a.s.c. Taka modyfikacja zapewniałaby systemową spójność i jasność prawa.
In this paper there were analysed the laws of the Act on name and surname change in context of their coherence with the Faamily and Guardianship Code as well as possible purposefulnes of exemption form the rule of persistence, constancy of surneme in the aspect executiom the rule of child wellfare and equality of parents' laws. To ensure the coherence the simple legislative procedure can be carried out, which is to modify the laws so taht they contain reference to the appropriate rules or to the Family and Guardianship Code, as it is in case of the Registry Office Recors Act. Modification of this kind woul ensure the systematical coherence and clarity of law.
In der vorliegenden Zusammenfassung wurde eine Analyse der Vorschrift vom Gesetz übet Änderung vom Vor- und Nachnamen im Kontext ihres Einklangs mit Fiamilien-und Vormundschaftsgesetzbuch sowie eventueller Zweckmäßigkeit vom Ausschluss der Grundsätze von Echtheit und Bestädingkeit des Nachnamen des Kindes im Aspect der Abwiclung vom Grundsatz des Kindesgutes sowie auch Gleichberechtigung beider Elternteile durchgeführt. Um Kohärenz zu gewährleisten ist ein einfacher Gesetzgebungsprozess durchzuführen, der darin besteht, die Vorschriften so zu modifizieren, dass sie die Verweise an entsprechende Normen oder Familien- und Vormundschaftsgesetzbuch enthalten, wie es im Falle vom polnischen Personenstandgesetz ist. Diese Modifizierung würde eine Systemkohärenz und Rechtsklarheit gewährleisten.

This article examines how case law deals with claims of grandparents who seek contact with their grandchildren against the will of one or both parents, and the scope given to their rights. The resulting state of the law is assessed taking into account the interests of all the parties involved (parents, grandparents, and grandchildren). The experience of more than twenty years of application of the specific provisions concerning grandparents’ contact rights sheds light on the impact of giving grandparents stronger legal rights. It also prompts the question of whether this legislative choice might have brought about useless and potentially harmful litigation.

Th e Chilean family legal system enshrines nowadays, the parental joint responsibility as one of the principles that guide the actions of the parents towards their children. Th is is a new fi gure that can positively transform the traditional structures of parent-child relationships in life apart from the parents. From there, the importance of understanding the meaning and scope of the principle and be aware of the challenges posed.

Turkey is already a party to the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction of 1980. This brief paper will consider some of the reasons why Turkey may find it advantageous to become a party to the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in respect of parental responsibility and measures for the protection of Children (the Hague Children's Convention 1996).

Comment on the judgment of the Court of Justice (Third Chamber) of 12 November 2014, C-656/13, L v M: Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction in matters of parental responsibility — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 12(3) — Child whose parents are not married — Prorogation of jurisdiction — No other related proceedings pending — Acceptance of jurisdiction — Challenge to the jurisdiction of a court by a party who has made an application to that court.

It is broadly accepted that child care decisions ought to be guided by the principle of the best interest of the child but there is no uniformity as to how to integrare such principie, which over the years has been embodied in different criteria that have been transformed into stereotypes that must be abandoned because the rigid structure that their assume is against the interest they intend to protect, by losing sight of the child in particular.

In this paper we will deal with the concept of the monstrous acts and the importance of parental responsibility in the novel Frankenstein. It is highlighted that it is easier to understand the reasons behind some “crimes” when the family relationships are analysed thoroughly. In the novel Frankenstein, there are some certain types of family relationships and under the shadow of these relationships, the relationship between father-like scientist and his creation is held successfully. By analysing some monstrous acts in the light on the flaws of parent-child relationship, we endeavour at demonstrating that Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is not a simple retelling of a monster fabricated by a disturbed mind. This way, the novel represents a cross between the influence of parents’ role in a child’s life and the degradation of Enlightenment ideas according to which only science and logic can reveal human “truths”, whereas Romanticism worked as a medium to veil or hinder personal fulfilment. Finally, this paper helps us see the real “monster” in our lives and parental responsibilities nowadays socially and historically, where Enlightenment ideologies and concerns such as intellectualism or humanism are still a groove of heightened debate.

Isvicre’de aile hukuku, 1912 senesinde yururluge giren Isvicre Medeni Kanunu’nda duzenlenmistir. Isvicre Medeni Kanunu neredeyse altmis yil boyunca hicbir degisiklige ugramamistir. Ancak 1970’lerden itibaren pek cok farkli konuda adim adim degisiklikler ve reformlar yapilmistir. Bu makalede, Isvicre aile hukuku hakkinda guncel gelismeler ve reformlara da isaret edilerek genel bilgi verilmistir. Bunlarin yani sira, evlenme ve bosanmaya, evlilik disi yasam birlikteligine ve escinsel birlikteliklere iliskin Isvicre hukukunda yer alan kurallara ve cocuklari ilgilendiren ornegin hisimlik, evlat edinme, velayet hakki ve nafaka gibi konulara iliskin hukuki duzenlemelere de deginilmistir. Ayrica bu makalede, kisaca isim ve cinsiyet degisikligi konularina iliskin Isvicre hukuk kurallarina deginilmis ve sonuc bolumunde Isvicre aile hukukunun gelecegine iliskin goruslerimize yer verilmistir.