赵信会

（山东财经大学法学院，济南 250014）

【摘 要】最高人民法院于 2011 年创制的亲子鉴定推定以实现亲子确认诉讼的确定性解决为目标，主要的缺陷是模糊了举证证明责任制度的程序地位、与举证证明责任的程序功能相悖、适用条件模糊。作为其理论依据的证明妨碍理论难以为亲子鉴定推定提供正当性，事实上域外很少有采用亲子鉴定推定的立法，即使个别采亲子鉴定推定立法例的国家，司法中对之的适用也非常谨慎。应对亲子确认诉讼中，当事人一方拒绝配合协助鉴定的情况，可以坚持直接强制为原则，并辅之鉴定材料的替代获取。

【关键词】亲子鉴定；证明妨碍推定；直接强制

【中图分类号】D915.13

【文献标识码】A

【文章编号】1674-1226（2016）06-0747-11

The DNA presumption and reform in paternity litigations. Zhao Xinhui. (Law School ofShandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014)

【Abstract】The aim of the DNA presumption,created by the Supreme People’s Court of the PRC in 2011, is to guarantee the certainty of the paternity action.The major defect of the DNA presumption is making the procedural status of the burden of proof be obscure, inconsistent with the procedural function of the burden of proof, and blurring the condition of application. As the basis of the DNA presumption, the theory of spoliation of evidence could not justify the DNA presumption. In fact, very few countries or districtshaveadopted the DNA presumption, and used it very carefully in judicial practice.When it comes to the situation that the parties refuse to cooperateduring the paternity test, we may insist on the direct mandatorymeasures with assistance by the alternative acquisitionforappraisal material.

【Key Words】 Paternity test, Spoliation of evidence, Presumption, Direct mandatory measures