成年监护范式的反思与进路：从替代决定到协助决定

摘要：替代决定和协助决定是两种成年监护的经典范式。《民法典》第22条在整合原《合同法》47条的基础上指出了对成年被监护人适用部分监护的立场。同法第35条第3款从文义上表达了“以独立为主，保障并协助为辅”的新监护观念。二法条都明确了成人监护并非完全监护，但是就其应当是以独立行权为主的协助监护还是非独立行权为主的替代监护，存在争议。对成人监护范式的理解应当建立在《民法典》总则编第二章体系解释基础上，将35条第3款直接解释为协助监护缺乏其他法条的价值支撑。本文将从论证《民法典》对监护模式的立法技术及其采取的范式出发，分析替代决定下的成年监护制度存在的范围不周延、老年人再边缘化以及重财轻人等问题，最后通过扩张解释22条与33条，达到和35条第3款在价值理念与行权范围上的统一，为协助决定的转型构造出法条空间。

Abstract: Substitution decision and assistance decision are the two classic paradigms of adult guardianship. Article 22 of the Civil Code points out the position of applying partial guardianship to adult wards based on the integration of Article 47 of the former Contract Law. Article 35, paragraph 3, of the same law expresses the new concept of guardianship in a textual sense, which is “based on independence, supplemented by safeguards and assistance”. Both articles make it clear that adult guardianship is not full guardianship, but there is a dispute as to whether it should be primarily independent and assisted guardianship or non-independent and substituted guardianship. The understanding of the adult guardianship paradigm should be based on the systematic interpretation of Chapter 2 of the General Provisions of the Civil Code, and the direct interpretation of Article 35(3) as assisted guardianship lacks the value support of other articles. This paper will start from the argumentation of the Civil Code’s legislative technology for the guardianship model and the paradigm it adopts, analyze the problems of the adult guardianship system under the substitute decision, such as the ill-defined scope, the re-marginalization of the elderly, and the emphasis on property rather than human beings, etc., and then finally, through the expansive interpretation of Articles 22 and 33, achieve the unity of the value concepts and scope of exercise with Article 35, paragraph 3, and construct the space of the law for the transformation of the assisted decision.