精神障碍者刑事责任能力制度的比较的研究.doc

摘要45 / 45.近现代刑法中,精神障碍者刑事责任能力制度集刑罚社会化、个别化、人道化于一身,符合刑罚发展基本趋势和人类文明进步的潮流,本文结合精神医学、法学、心理学等学科知识,从刑事一体化的视角并在综合运用比较研究与规范分析方法的基础上,对精神障碍者刑事责任能力的问题进行了较为系统的探讨本文除引言和结语外,共分以下四部分：第一部分：精神障碍者刑事责任能力概述本部分首先介绍了刑法学上精神障碍的概念和范围,以精神医学对精神障碍的界定为基础同时考虑刑法本身的目的和责任主义的要求,由此得出刑法学中精神障碍的概念从医学角度更深入的了解精神障碍的症状、原因和分类,由我国刑法关于刑事责任能力程度的划分得出精神障碍者刑事责任能力的定义最后对国内外关于精神障碍者刑事责任能力的规定进行了历史回顾,阐明了法律对这一问题相关规定的演变及其原因,以资借鉴,并在此基础上分析此问题的走向第二部分：关于确定精神障碍者刑事责任能力的标准的比较刑事法律对精神障碍者刑事责任能力的立法方式,即精神障碍者刑事责任能力的确定标准对精神障碍者的刑事责任能力,各国刑法虽然作了相应的规定,但其判定标准或所采取的立法方式不一致,分为生物学标准、心理学标准和折衷标准三类。

第三部分：关于精神障碍者刑事责任能力等级划分的比较各国刑法在刑事责任能力的等级分类方面采取了两种不同的制度,即二分制与三分制采用三分制的各国刑法,对于限制刑事责任能力的精神障碍者,是否必然减轻刑责和从宽处罚,以及刑责减轻和处罚从宽的程度有所不同,主要有必减制、得减制和特别规定制第四部分：精神障碍者刑事责任能力法定标准的具体规定方式的比较刑事责任能力法定标准的具体规定方式,是考察与比较分析各国刑法对精神障碍者刑事责任能力的规定的重要内容,主要包括两个方面,即辨认能力和控制能力的相互关系,限制刑事责任能力和完全刑事责任能力判定标准的关系等而我国刑事立法对精神障碍者刑事责任能力的规定,经历了从 1979 年的《刑法典》的二分制到 1997 年的《刑法典》的三分制的变化II.关键词：精神障碍,刑事责任能力,判定标准,规定方式III.ABSTRACTIn modern criminal law, criminal responsibility of mental patient has a combination of socialization,individualization and humanity on itself, which accords with the development trend of punishment and thetide of civilization progress tide. The thesis talks deeply and systematically about provisions of the mentalcriminal responsibility, referring to the psychiatry, jurisprudence and psychology,from the perspective ofcriminal integration and by means of comparison study as well as standard analyze.The thesis consists of four parts except preface and conclusion summery.Part one, general introduction of mental criminal responsibility, which introduces the concept alongwith the scope of mental criminal responsibility firstly, and the symptom, causes and classification ofmental criminal are discussed more deeply in the point of iatrology. According to the classification ofmental criminal responsibility in the criminal law, the concept of mental responsibility can be made as "aqualification of mental patient fitting with the provisions about legal mental responsibility who should.realize the sequence of his or hers, thus committing offence should be responsible for the act."Then.overview the history of mental responsibility in China and abroad, some references may be used properlyand on which base, the trend of it is analyzed.Part two, about comparison of standard mental responsibility determination. Though commonprovisions formulated accordingly about mental criminal responsibility exist in any country, thedetermination standards differ from each other, which generally including three kinds of standards, that is,biologic, psychological and composing criterion.Part three, about the comparison of mental responsibility classification,even though the commonprovisions formulated definitely about mental criminal responsibility exist in any country, the ranks ofclassification in every country are different from each other in that the methods of classification aredifferent, which are the binary system and the third system. The countries where the third system is appliedhave different provisions on the limited mental responsibility that is, whether or not put on them thenecessary litigated punishment or lenient punishment, as well as the degree of reducing penalty and lenientpunishment being different. Necessary reduce system, may reduce system and special provisions system.IV.Part four, comparison about abstract ways of provisions on the legal statutory standard of mentalcriminal responsibility. The actual ways of statutory standard provisions on mental responsibility mainlyinclude the relationship between indentify ability and control ability as well as the determination standardof full ability of criminal responsibility and limited criminal responsibility , which are three main aspects intotal. They are one of the important contents of studying and analyzing the provisions on mentalresponsibility in the criminal law of every country, which should not be ignored. The provisions about themental criminal responsibility in China criminal law go through the change from the binary system ofCriminal Law of 1979 to the third system of Criminal Law of 1997..KEY WORDS:mental disability, criminal responsibility, determination standard,the prescribed.mannerV.关于学位论文独创声明和学术诚信承诺本人向XX大学提出硕士学位申请。

本人郑重声明：所呈交的学位论文是本人在导师的指导下独立完成的,对所研究的课题有新的见解据我所知,除文中特别加以说明、标注和致谢的地方外,论文中不包括其他人已经发表或撰写过的研究成果,也不包括其他人为获得任何教育、科研机构的学位或证书而使用过的材料与我一同工作的同事对本研究所做的任何贡献均已在论文中作了明确的说明并表示了谢意在此本人郑重承诺：所呈交的学位论文不存在舞弊作伪行为,文责自负学位申请人〔学位论文作者签名：.201年月日.关于学位论文著作权使用授权书本人经XX大学审核批准授予硕士学位作为学位论文的作者,本人完全了解并同意XX大学有关保留、使用学位论文的要求,即XX大学有权向国家图书馆、科研信息机构、数据收集机构和本校图书馆等提供学位论文〔纸质文本和电子文本以供公众检索、查阅本人授权XX大学出于宣扬、展览学校学术发展和进行学术交流等目的,可以采取影印、缩印、扫描和拷贝等复制手段保存、汇编学位论文〔纸质文本和电子文本〔涉及保密内容的学位论文在解密后适用本授权书学位获得者〔学位论文作者签名：.201年月日.学位论文指导教师签名：.201年月日.引引言言.我国的精神障碍者因长期被忽视而远离了人们的视线,对于精神。