对于家庭暴力案件中受虐妇女杀夫行为导致施暴者重伤或者死亡的情况,司法实践中的处理方式通常是定罪轻罚,仅从量刑角度找到从宽处罚的理由,忽略了从定罪角度给予其妥当化的定性评价从而出罪的可能性。通过正当防卫扩张论以及期待可能...对于家庭暴力案件中受虐妇女杀夫行为导致施暴者重伤或者死亡的情况,司法实践中的处理方式通常是定罪轻罚,仅从量刑角度找到从宽处罚的理由,忽略了从定罪角度给予其妥当化的定性评价从而出罪的可能性。通过正当防卫扩张论以及期待可能性理论来评价受虐妇女杀夫行为从而出罪的路径都存在问题。防御性紧急避险为受虐妇女杀夫的行为提供了一条更合适的出罪路径,满足时间条件、不得已条件以及限度条件的,就能够评价为防御性紧急避险而阻却违法。首先,家庭暴力是一种临近的不法攻击或持续性危险。其次,杀夫行为是受虐妇女迫不得已的选择。最后,对杀人行为进行利益衡量。因此,家庭暴力的受暴妇女身处遭受家庭暴力甚至被施暴致死的危险当中,为保护自身以及其他亲人的生命法益,走投无路,趁施暴者不备将其杀死的行为,符合防御性紧急避险的构成要件,可以此作为其出罪事由。为家庭暴力中受虐妇女杀夫行为的定性问题找到一种解决思路,更好地实现公平正义。In the case of domestic violence, the battered woman’s act of killing her husband leads to serious injury or death of the abuser, the way of judicial practice is usually conviction and light punishment, and the reason for lenient punishment is found only from the perspective of sentencing, ignoring the possibility of giving proper qualitative evaluation from the perspective of conviction to convict. There are some problems in evaluating the ways of battered women killing their husbands through the theory of justifiable defense expansion and the theory of expectant possibility. Defensive emergency hedging provides a more appropriate way for battered women to kill their husbands. If it meets the conditions of time, necessity and limitation, it can be evaluated that defensive emergency hedging is illegal. First, domestic violence is an imminent unlawful assault or ongoing danger. Secondly, the act of husband killing is a forced choice for battered women. Finally, the benefit of killing behavior is measured. Therefore, women who are victims of domestic violence are in danger of being subjected to domestic violence or even killed by violence. In order to protect their own lives and the legal interests of other relatives, they have no choice but to kill the abuser when he is unprepared, which meets the constitutive requirements of defensive emergency avoidance and can be used as the cause of their crime. To find a way to solve the qualitative problem of battered women’s husband killing behavior in domestic violence, so as to better realize fairness and justice.展开更多
文摘对于家庭暴力案件中受虐妇女杀夫行为导致施暴者重伤或者死亡的情况,司法实践中的处理方式通常是定罪轻罚,仅从量刑角度找到从宽处罚的理由,忽略了从定罪角度给予其妥当化的定性评价从而出罪的可能性。通过正当防卫扩张论以及期待可能性理论来评价受虐妇女杀夫行为从而出罪的路径都存在问题。防御性紧急避险为受虐妇女杀夫的行为提供了一条更合适的出罪路径,满足时间条件、不得已条件以及限度条件的,就能够评价为防御性紧急避险而阻却违法。首先,家庭暴力是一种临近的不法攻击或持续性危险。其次,杀夫行为是受虐妇女迫不得已的选择。最后,对杀人行为进行利益衡量。因此,家庭暴力的受暴妇女身处遭受家庭暴力甚至被施暴致死的危险当中,为保护自身以及其他亲人的生命法益,走投无路,趁施暴者不备将其杀死的行为,符合防御性紧急避险的构成要件,可以此作为其出罪事由。为家庭暴力中受虐妇女杀夫行为的定性问题找到一种解决思路,更好地实现公平正义。In the case of domestic violence, the battered woman’s act of killing her husband leads to serious injury or death of the abuser, the way of judicial practice is usually conviction and light punishment, and the reason for lenient punishment is found only from the perspective of sentencing, ignoring the possibility of giving proper qualitative evaluation from the perspective of conviction to convict. There are some problems in evaluating the ways of battered women killing their husbands through the theory of justifiable defense expansion and the theory of expectant possibility. Defensive emergency hedging provides a more appropriate way for battered women to kill their husbands. If it meets the conditions of time, necessity and limitation, it can be evaluated that defensive emergency hedging is illegal. First, domestic violence is an imminent unlawful assault or ongoing danger. Secondly, the act of husband killing is a forced choice for battered women. Finally, the benefit of killing behavior is measured. Therefore, women who are victims of domestic violence are in danger of being subjected to domestic violence or even killed by violence. In order to protect their own lives and the legal interests of other relatives, they have no choice but to kill the abuser when he is unprepared, which meets the constitutive requirements of defensive emergency avoidance and can be used as the cause of their crime. To find a way to solve the qualitative problem of battered women’s husband killing behavior in domestic violence, so as to better realize fairness and justice.
文摘目的观察双相情感障碍患者冲动性攻击行为的发生与儿童期受虐及认知功能的影响。方法将龙岩市第三医院2019年1月-2021年12月收治的60例双相情感障碍患者以外显行为攻击量表(modified overt aggression scale,MOAS)分组,其中冲动组23例及无冲动组37例。评价双相情感障碍患者冲动性攻击行为的发生与儿童期受虐及认知功能的关系。结果冲动组患者中存在儿童期受虐15例(65.22%),高于无冲动组7例(18.92%)(χ^(2)=13.092,P<0.05)。冲动组患者中蒙特利尔认知评估量表(Montreal cognitive assessment,MoCA)评分低于无冲动组(P<0.05)。冲动组患者各项实施认知评估以重复性成套神经心理状态测验(repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status,RBANS)测试结果低于无冲动组(P<0.05)。将对RBANS测试结果(0=未有影响,1=有影响)作为因变量,对认知评估、对服药认识、对疾病复发及求助方式认识及总分作为自变量,经Logistic回归分析显示,双相情感障碍患者儿童期受虐及MoCA评分低下均为诱发冲动攻击行为发生的危险因素(P<0.05)。结论在双相情感障碍患者中,儿童期受虐及认知功能低下会造成冲动性攻击行为;因此,早期对患者开展儿童时期是否受虐的调查,并评价其认知功能评分,有助于判定是否存在冲动攻击行为,并且可以开展早期的干预,以获得更好的效果。
