Criminal Liability for Guardianship Negligence: Legal Gaps and Reforms in the Protection of Minors

The absence of criminal liability for guardianship negligence in China's legal framework has created a structural dilemma: while civil and administrative remedies prove insufficient in deterring gross negligence, criminal intervention encounters value conflicts between "parental ethics" and "state parental rights". Comparative analysis of extraterritorial legislation reveals distinct approaches - civil law jurisdictions establish refined offense systems centered on "infringement of legal interests", whereas common law systems employ an "administrative preemption with risk prevention" mechanism for timely intervention. To address this, China should adopt a dual-path strategy integrating "legal interest protection" and "risk governance", proposing amendments to the Criminal Law through provisions like "negligent guardianship" and establishing a tiered liability system characterized by "categorized misconduct + graduated sanctions". Concurrent improvements should encompass judicial guidelines, administrative early-warning mechanisms, and social support networks, ultimately forming a collaborative governance framework featuring "targeted intervention - corrective adjustments - technological safeguards".

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific journal of humanities and social sciences.
Published
2025-03-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.54691/5mhkvx70
Primary Topic
Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Criminal Liability for Guardianship Negligence: Legal Gaps and Reforms in the Protection of Minors

Mengyuan Yu
Scientific journal of humanities and social sciences.
Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
article

Criminal Liability for Guardianship Negligence: Legal Gaps and Reforms in the Protection of Minors

Mengyuan Yu
article en

Abstract

The absence of criminal liability for guardianship negligence in China's legal framework has created a structural dilemma: while civil and administrative remedies prove insufficient in deterring gross negligence, criminal intervention encounters value conflicts between "parental ethics" and "state parental rights". Comparative analysis of extraterritorial legislation reveals distinct approaches - civil law jurisdictions establish refined offense systems centered on "infringement of legal interests", whereas common law systems employ an "administrative preemption with risk prevention" mechanism for timely intervention. To address this, China should adopt a dual-path strategy integrating "legal interest protection" and "risk governance", proposing amendments to the Criminal Law through provisions like "negligent guardianship" and establishing a tiered liability system characterized by "categorized misconduct + graduated sanctions". Concurrent improvements should encompass judicial guidelines, administrative early-warning mechanisms, and social support networks, ultimately forming a collaborative governance framework featuring "targeted intervention - corrective adjustments - technological safeguards".

Scientific journal of humanities and social sciences.Vol. 7(3)
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.