臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在人類歷史的演進上，世界人口已經達到一個里程碑。由於醫療技術以及飲食衛生的進步，世界上的年輕人口數目超過年長人口數目。然而，這個世界正在老化，臺灣的人口結構也呈現了這個
現象。由於生活條件進步，人們活得比以前更久，但也卻活得更不健康；越來越多年長的人在邁入老年時期之際因許多精神上疾病而受苦，其中最常見的就是老年痴呆和阿茲海默症。隨著年紀
漸長或因前開疾病而意思能力喪失或減損，就變成面對老化時一個無法避免的問題。面對這種情況，人們如何為自己做決定？由誰來決定這些人是否還具有完整的意思能力？這些問題迫切需要
解決方案，而成年監護制度似乎是一個適當的答案。
在臺灣，成年監護制度的實體法規定早在民法親屬編當中已有規定；程序法部分則規定於民事訴訟法人事訴訟程序的章節當中；而後修法時，民事訴訟法當中人事訴訟程序規定全數被刪除，部
分內容挪到家事事件法當中，現成年監護制度的程序部分已全數規定於家事事件法當中。然而，成年監護制度在實務上很少被討論到的問題即為意思能力的決定標準，以及為監護宣告裁定後法
院的監督措施。
除了當事人意思能力決定標準之外，本文亦談論監護人的角色、權限與限制，以及法院的角色與事後監督措施。藉由引用英國意思能力法、實務規章(Code of Practice，由英國的The Stationery
Office代表The Department of Constitutional Affairs發行)、美國統一成年監護保護程序法(Uniform Guardianship Protective Proceedings Act)規定以及相關美國法院判決，盼能作為臺灣成年監護制度
更臻完善的參考。

The world is on the milestone of demographic. From the beginning the recorded history, young children have outnumbered their elders—partly in thanks to a better medical support that has been developing towards extending the life expectancy of human beings, and partly also in thanks to the extremely abundant food supply in most countries all over the world. On the one hand, the overall statistics of the world indicates that the world is ageing. On the other hand, the statistics of any specific country—for example, Taiwan, also reveals the same in its population structure. As of April 2016, Taiwan Ministry of the Interior, Department of Statistics published the ageing index at the rate of 94.46%—meaning that every one hundred persons under the age of 14, there will be more than 94 people age 65 or over.
In Taiwan, the adult guardianship scheme has long been adopted ever since the enactment of the Taiwan Civil Code. However, that was the substantive part of guardianship, and it was until 2012 that the procedural part of guardianship was enacted through the enactment of Family Proceedings Act. The enactment of Family Proceedings Act has highlighted the issues contained in the adult guardianship, and has therefore raised scholars’ attention as never before. Before the enactment of Family Proceedings Act, main stipulations for adult guardianship has long been placed in the Taiwan Civil Code, Part IV of Chapter 10 Section 2“Guardianship and Assistantship over Adults”; however, little has been discussed over adult guardianship and assistantship—especially over the determination of whether a person still possesses full mental capacity, and the monitoring scheme of adult guardianship.
Accordingly, the essence of this essay is to discuss the standards of determining a person’s incapacity, a guardian’s the powers and the limits therein, and the court’s authority in determination of the incapacity, appointment and removal of a guardian, and monitoring of a guardian’s performance over the course of a guardianship. The above discussion shall be conducted by comparing the laws and practices between the UK, the US, and Taiwan—main focus will be laid in the US court practices given the sources available.

Table of Content
Chapter 1. Adult Guardianship 1
A. Introduction 1
B. Objective and Scope of Research 3
C. Methodology 5
Chapter 2. An Overview of Adult Guardianship 7
A. Introduction 7
B. Determination of Incapacity 8
C. Appointment of Guardian 10
D. Issues under Adult Guardianship 11
Chapter 3. Adult Guardianship in Comparison 13
A. International Documents 13
(1) Hague Convention on the International Protection of Adults 13
(2) Yokohama Declaration 13
B. UK 16
(1) Lack of Capacity 17
(2) The Court of Protection and the Public Guardian 18
C. US 19
(1) UGPPA 20
(2) Common Elements of Guardianship Law in Different States 25
D. Taiwan 27
(1) Substantive Guardianship/Assistantship Laws 27
(2) Procedural Guardianship/Assistantship Laws 30
Chapter 4. Determination of Incapacity and Burden of Proof, Guardian Decisions Guiding Principles 33
A. Determination of Incapacity: Medical/Clinical Assessment 33
B. Weight of Incompetent Person’s Opinions and Guiding Principles for Guardian Decisions 37
(1) Guidance for Guardian in Making Surrogate Decision 37
(2) Risk-Relative Capacity 40
(3) Best Interest Approach 43
(4) Substituted Judgement Approach 46
(5) Advance Directive: Its Advocacy and Opposition 53
C. Burden of Proof in Determining Incapacity 57
(1) Substantial Evidence: In re Edith Armstrong 57
(2) Clear and Convincing Evidence: In re Bryan 61
(3) Clear and Convincing Evidence: In re Guardianship of Corless 64
Chapter 5. Individual-appointed Guardian, Court-Appointed Guardian, and the Court 68
A. Role of Individual-appointed Guardian 68
B. Role of Court-appointed Guardian: Agent of Court or Ward? 69
C. Role of Court 74
(1) Appointment of Guardian 74
(2) Supervision over Guardian’s Action 81
D. Sub-conclusion 84
Chapter 6. Conclusion 85
References: 89

References:
1.English (in Alphabetic Order)
1.1Text Books
British Medical Association, Assessment of Mental Capacity: Guidance for Doctors and Lawyers (2d ed. 2004)
Buchanan, Allen E. & Brock, Dan W., Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making (Cambridge University Press, 1990)
Foster, Peggy, ‘Informed Consent in Practice’, Sally Sheldon & Michael Thomson eds. in Feminist Perspectives on Health Care Law (Cavendish Pub. 1998)
McMahan, Jeff, The Ethics of Killing: Problems at the Margins of Life, (Oxford University Press, 2002).
Meisel, Alan &Cerminara, Kathy L., The Right to Die: The Law of End-of-Life Decision Making, (Aspen Publishers Online, 3d ed., 2004)
Melton, Gary et al., Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers (2d Ed. 1997).
1.2Periodicals
Berghmans, Ron, Dickenson, Donna & Meulen, Ruud Ter, Mental Capacity: In Search of Alternative Perspectives, 12 Health Care Analysis 251 (2004)
Berg, Jessica Wilen, Appelbaum, Paul S. & Grisso, Thomas, Constructing Competence: Formulating Standards of Legal Competence to Make Medical Decisions, 48 Rutgers L. Rev. 345 (1996).
Boxx, Karen E., The Durable Power of Attorney's Place in the Family of Fiduciary Relationships, 36 Ga. L. Rev. 1(2001)
Buller, Tom, Competence and Risk-Relativity, 15 Bioethics 93 (2001)
Cantor, Norman L., The Bane of Surrogate Decision-Making Defining the Best Interests of Never-Competent Persons, 26 J. Leg. Med. 155 (2005)
Culver, Charles M. & Gert, Bernard, The Inadequacy of Incompetence, 68 Milbank Q. 619 (1990)
Drane, James F., The Many Faces of Competency, 15 Hastings Ctr Rep. 17 (1985).
Dresser, Rebecca, Missing Persons: Legal Perceptions of Incompetent Patients, 46 Rutgers L. Rev. 609 (1994)
Dresser, Rebecca, Schiavo's Legacy: The Need for an Objective Standard, 35 Hastings Center Rep. 20 (2005)
Dworkin, Ronald, Autonomy and the Demented Self, 64 Milbank Q. 4, 8 (1986)
Ershow-Levenberg, Linda S., Guardianship Actions against Individuals Who Have Selected a Power of Attorney: When Should the Court Say No?, 7 Marquette Elder’s Advisor 83 (2005)
Francis, Leslie Pickering, Decision-Making at the End of Life: Patients with Alzheimer's or Other Dementias, 35 Ga. L. Rev. 539 (2001)
Frolik, Lawrence A., Is a Guardian the Alter Ego of the Ward?, 37 Stetson L. Rev. 53 (2007)
Gunn, Michael, The Meaning of Incapacity, 2 Med. L. Rev. 8 (1994)
Herring, Jonathan, Entering the Fog: On The Borderlines of Mental Capacity, 83 Indiana Law Journal 1619 (2008)
Janzen, Peter S., Law at the Edge of Life: Issues of Death and Dying, 7 Hamline L. Rev. 431 (1984)
Jennings, Bruce, Freedom Fading: On Dementia, Best Interests, and Public Safety, 35 Ga. L. Rev. 593 (2001)
Knauer, Nancy J., Defining Capacity: Balancing the Competing Interests of Autonomy and Need, 12 TEMP. POL. & CIV. RTS. L. REV. 2003 (2010)
Maclean, Alasdair R., Advance Directives, Future Selves and Decision-making, 14 Med. L. Rev. 291 (2006).
Mosoff, Judith, Motherhood Madness and Law, 45 U. Toronto L.J. 107 (1995)
O’Sullivan, Joan L., Role of the Attorney for the Alleged Incapacitated Person, 31 Stetson L. Rev. 687, (2002)
Rich, Ben A., Medical Paternalism v. Respect for Patient Autonomy: The More Things Change the More They Remain the Same, 10 Mich. St. Univ. J. Med. & L. 87 (2006).
Scott, Elizabeth S. & Scott, Robert E., Parents as Fiduciaries, 81 Va. L. Rev. 2401 (1995)
Silberfeld, Michel & Checkland, David, Faulty Judgment, Expert Opinion, and Decision-Making Capacity, 20 Theoretical Med. & Bioethics 377 (1999)
Steel, William E, The Right to Die: New Options in California, 93 Christian Century 996 (1976)
Strang, D., Molloy, D.W. & Harrison, C., Capacity to Choose Place of Residence: Autonomy vs Beneficence? 14 J. Palliative Care 25, 26 (1998)
Whitton, Linda & Frolik, Lawrence A., Surrogate Decision-Making Standards for Guardians: Theory and Reality, 3 Utah L. Rev. 1491 (2012)
1.3Judicial Decisions
Birnbaum v. Birnbaum, 539 N.E.2d 574 (N.Y. 1989)
Bliss vs Bliss, 104 A.467, 471(Md.1918)
In Matter of Conservatorship of Torres, 357 N.W.2d 332 (Minn. 1984)
In re Bearden, 86 S.W.2d 585, 594(Mo. App. 1935)
In re Bryan, 531 So.2d 1062 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
In re Bryan, 550 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 1989)
In re Colyer, 99 Wn.2d 114, 137, 660 P.2d 738 (1983)
In re Est. of Wellman, 673 N.E. 2d 272 (Ill, 1996)
In re Fiori, 673 A.2d 905 (Pa. 1996)
In re Guardianship of Christiansen, 248 Cal. App. 2d 398 (1967)
In re Guardianship of Corless, 2 Ohio App.3d 92, 440 N.E.2d 1203 (1981)
In re Guardianship of Ingram, 102 Wn.2d 827 (1984)
In re Guardianship of Pruitt, 842 P.2d 771 (Okla. Civ. App. 1992)
In re Guardianship of Wilson, 23 Ohio App. 390 (1926)
In re James Kustka, 163 Misc.2d 694, 622 N.Y.S.2d 208 (1994)
In re Quinlan, 70 N.J. 10, 41, 355 A.2d 647 (1976)
In the Matter of the alleged Incompetency of Edith Armstrong, 573 S.W.2d 141 (Mo. Ct. App. 1978)
Louis Schlesinger Co. v. Wilson, 127 A. 2d 13 (N.J. 1956)
State v. Northern, 563 S.W.2d 197, 212 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1978) (Drowota, Judge, concurring)
Super Intendent of Belchertown St. Sch v. Saikewicz, 370 N.E. 2d 417 (Mass. 1977)
1.4Others
Alastair R. Maclean, Caesarean Sections, Competence and the Illusion of Autonomy, Web J. Current Legal Issues, available at http:// webjcli.ncl.ac.uk/1999/issue1/maclean1.html
American Bar Association Commission on Law and Aging & American Psychology Association, Assessment of Older Adults with Diminished Capacity: A Handbook for Psychologists (2008)
American Bar Association Commission on Law and Aging & American Psychology Association & National College of Probate Judges, Judicial Determination of Capacity of Older Adults in Guardianship Proceedings (2006)
Center for Elders and the Courts, http://www.eldersandcourts.org/Guardianship/Guardianship-Basics/State-Laws.aspx
Department for Constitutional Affairs, Explanatory Notes to Mental Capacity Act 2005
Mental Capacity Act 2005, Code of Practice (2007)
Taiwan Ministry of the Interior, Department of Statistics, definition of ageing index, http://www.moi.gov.tw/stat/chart.aspx
Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act 199/1998 with Prefatory Note and Comments (2014)
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, World Population Ageing, Annex I, Definition of Indicators of Population Ageing, http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/worldageing19502050/pdf/95annexi.pdf
World Health Organization, Global Health and Ageing, http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/global_health.pdf
2.Mandarin (Listed in Terms of Number of Character Strokes of Author Name)
2.1Text Books
林秀雄, 親屬法講義，第三版，元照出版社，2013年
姜世明，民事訴訟法基礎論，第七版，元照出版， 2014年
姜世明，家事事件法論，第二版，元照出版社，2013年
陳榮宗、林慶苗，民事訴訟法，修訂六版，三民出版社，2015年
陳棋炎、黃宗樂、郭振恭，民法親屬新論，修訂八版，三民出版社， 2009年8月
戴炎輝、戴東雄、戴瑀如，親屬法，自版，2010年
2.2Periodicals
李立如，〈成年監護制度與法院功能的演進—以受監護人權益保障為中心〉，東海大學法學研究第45期，2015年4月
林秀雄，〈論我國新修正之成年監護制度〉，月旦法學雜誌第164期，2009年1月
郭明政，〈禁治產人與成年人監護制度之檢討—德國補導法及其對台灣之啟示〉，《固有法制與當代民事法學—戴東雄教授六秩華誕祝壽論文集》（1997年8月）
黃詩淳，〈高齡者之財產管理—美國持續性代理權授與及信託的啟示〉，《中研院法學期刊》第9期，2011年9月
戴瑀如，〈初探德國成年輔助法—兼論我國成年監護制度〉，月旦法學雜誌第167期，2009年4月
2.3Dissertations
林佩妤，〈成年監護制度之研究〉，國立政治大學法學院碩士在職專班碩士論文，2010年
2.4Judicial Decisions
臺灣新北地方法院105年度監宣字第300號民事裁定
臺灣臺中地方法院105年度監宣字第213號民事裁定
臺灣臺北地方法院105年度監宣字第107號民事裁定
臺灣台北地方法院104年度監宣字第518號民事裁定
臺灣士林地方法院104年度監宣字第126號民事裁定
臺灣高等法院臺中分院101年度家抗字第18號民事裁定
臺灣新北地方法院103年度監宣字第81號民事裁定