"Chinese woman signs up for " small letter fair number on March 28 message, su Dajiang is " make dad " -- this is to see overheat sow drama " Dou Ting is good " the unified caliber that netizens give out.
Strong revive after the mother dies, the feel vexed of the half a lifetime before Su Dajiang is swept and cowardly, begin a day to make the land, want to brush an existence by force in the home to feel:
Him of one mind thinks only reap without sowing, how does children remind become the wind other ear, home of whole finally body was cheated, shouting to jump even building;
Should follow eldest son Ming Zhe to go to the United States living big house, regrettablly bright sagacious unemployment did not go, he goes back on his word to not comply on the ground not forgive, still do not forget to follow the 2 sons that comfort him and daughter-in-law at that time " act like a spoiled child " , "I want to drink a hand to grind coffee " ...
Su Dajiang is made when rising, enough makes an audience so angry that throw a remote controller, even somebody puts forward " provide for the aged does not raise Su Dajiang " catchword.
Can why does the viewing rate of this drama reach discussion rate to go high all the time still however? Because,that is such old man " be like the acquaintance between Ceng Zairen " , chase after the young associate of drama, sure to provide for the aged this one problem arose deeper reflection.
The judge talks about the problem of a few law that appears in drama below.
Problem one: Su Dajiang has every months of pension of 5000 money obviously, grasp all the time however not beautiful in the hand, however all sorts of go up from children body " claw " . Can the pension of the old person touch the solatium of children?
Judge commentate law --
Swing a face to children at ordinary times child, changed immediately to money a pair of face. Of Su Dajiang " do not eat to be not drunk want money only " behavior not only become acute children is contradictory, the provide for problem that still invites him old age was immersed in awkward condition. The netizen says, like Su Dajiang selfishness of this kind of extreme, a bit is not the person of children consider, let him taking him pension to pass. But, such proposal is in jural was not to pass to close however.
The citizen that support old person is legal provision is basic and compulsory, support level should the effective demand in the limit of with the old person, consider the factor such as income of family, children, burden integratedly. Generally speaking, if the old person has the income such as hire of hack of pension, building, this income can be used strong support provide for fee, absolve filial solatium appropriately inside corresponding limits namely. But this does not mean the provide for obligation that avoids children, below the condition that allows in reality however, reduce filial burden appropriately.
Have steady pension income so like Su Dajiang, can lose carried limits alone in him inside, the court won't make mandatory demand to children again commonly. But if his income can't pay provide for the aged fee, that is not worth partial in principle to answer You Mingzhe, bright into, Ming Yusan children partakes.
Want to know, provide for is economically contented not just, corporeal condition is one part only, the more that the old person needs still is company. Guarantee a standard according to rights and interests of our country old people, provide for obligation basically includes " economically make offerings to, attend on the life and the solace on spirit " , children still should be fulfilled actively attend on the life and the legal obligation such as the solace on spirit.
Problem 2: Su Dajiang follows 2 sons bright become and the daughter-in-law lives together, accumulated rancor of history of family of young daughter Ming Yuyin, not happy event and association of 2 elder brother and father, reason is seldom visit. Is this kind of practice in jural reasonable?
Judge commentate law --
The audience that seeks theatrical work people express to sympathize with to teenager experience of Ming Yu mostly, think Ming Yu is done had had conscience very much, cannot Ming Yujing of again exorbitant requirement often visits father. But, legal principle and reason are different after all. The judge reminds, although parents and a children live jointly, other children still often should be visited.
Law of safeguard of rights and interests of our country old people makes clear a regulation the 18th times, "Domestic member ought to care the mental demand of old people, do not get negligence, desolate old people. With the domestic member that old people lives apart, often ought to be visited or send one's respects to old people. Unit of choose and employ persons ought to ensure support person to visit one's family about the regulation according to the country off right. " in real life, the old person is average meeting and a children live jointly, more counts on this children to attend daily to oneself, but do not mean the provide for obligation that avoided other children. Other children still should be in other side more, fulfil provide for obligation better, as usual sees an old person, buy things of the dress, every day object, medical treatment to wait according to the need of the old person, in old life disease be in hospital needs to attend wait for a circumstance to fall, also should fulfill attend wait for obligation.
Our country law also has the regulation that rewards a gender to fulfilling provide for obligation. The regulation in inheritance act: "Main to was being used up by heir bring up is compulsory or with the heir that is lived jointly by heir, when distributing bequest, can much cent. " manage together, if have property distributive before old life, the children that acquires more property also should assume more provide for obligation.
Anyhow, the essential objective of provide for is to ensure an old person how to enjoy old age, make an old person old be depended on somewhat, it is the obligation of each children.
Problem 3: In drama concentration, ming Yu divulges oneself and parents had signed an agreement, general content dies to consider parents old in the future, also do not need bury a parent of bright jade provide for the aged, the thing of Home Su does not have the least bit relation again with her. Spoken parts in an opera, it is Ming Yu and parents two break off parentage of one's own accord. But, is this kind of statement that breaks off parentage in jural effective? Whether can belongings still accede after disengage?
Judge commentate law --
Above all, statement is invalid. In literature and work of movie and TV, we often can be heard " I should follow your disinheritance " state similarly etc. But contradiction puts in contradiction 's charge, be based on consanguineous formation parentage cannot cut apart. Our country law is done not have to breaking off parentage this one behavior makes any provisions, parentage is impossible to because one paper states,remove.
Accordingly, whether successive belongings follows to whether state breaking off parentage is irrelevant apparently. Children to dying the successive means of parental bequest has two kinds, namely legal and successive accede with the will. Our country inheritance act sets the 5th times, accede after beginning, have testamentary according to legal and successive conduction; , undertake according to will afterwards manage. And according to inheritance act the 7th, there are one of following actions in heir only, just will bring about forfeit right of inheritance: (One) kill intentionally by the;(of heir 2) the;(of to contend for bequest killing and other successor 3) abandon by heir, perhaps mistreat the;(with serious section of favor be accedinged 4) forge, distort or will of destroy by melting or burning, the clue is serious.
Accordingly, to statement " already disinheritance " children, short of makes above conduct, it is to have the right of successive parents bequest. Of course, grown children still also has the obligation of provide for, assist and protection to parents. (writer unit: Court of people of Beijing Haidian division)
