Publicação

A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita

Ver documento

Detalhes bibliográficos
Resumo:The purpose of this Internship Report was to study the role of the Children’s Protection Commission in the civil godfathering and compare this institute with the parental responsibilities and the already revoked restrict adoption, to understand if there are advantages on creating this legal bind in comparison to the others and in which way. Were determined as advantages: the less demanding requirements; the easier way to dismiss the consent for the creation of this bind than it was for the restrict adoption and the easier way to revoke it, the fact that there aren’t any succession rights or last name changes; the benefits in terms of taxes, work absences and licenses for care and social benefits for the godparents. But the civil godfathering is not a stranger to criticism from the legal doctrine, being some of the censure: the discrimination of the godchildren in relation to the godparent’s children; the constant interaction that is required between the godparents and the godchild’s biological family which may lead to conflict and the contact permission that is given to the ex-godparents after the godfathering being revoked. Other problems exist, such as: the time that passes between the approval from the court of the godfathering compromise signed in the Children’s Protection Commissions and the extension of it when the compromise needs to return to them to be corrected and to be submitted to the court once again; the need to insert clauses minding alimony, visitation rights and limitations to the parental responsibilities, when the Commissions have no powers to decide and change them and also the lack of knowledge of the institute coming from it being in a different legal diploma, from the amount of cases that exist in each Commission and from the lack of legal technicians in these entities.
Autores principais:Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa
Assunto:apadrinhamento civil CPCJ responsabilidades parentais responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro adoção restrita
Ano:2017
País:Portugal
Tipo de documento:dissertação de mestrado
Tipo de acesso:acesso aberto
Instituição associada:Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Idioma:português
Origem:Repositório Institucional da UNL
_version_ 1865920615523811328
author Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa
author_facet Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa
Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa
author_role author
contributor_name_str_mv Martins, João Zenha
Campos, Rita
RUN
country_str PT
creators_json_str [{\"Person.name\":\"Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa\"}]
datacite.contributors.contributor.contributorName.fl_str_mv Martins, João Zenha
Campos, Rita
RUN
datacite.creators.creator.creatorName.fl_str_mv Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa
datacite.date.Accepted.fl_str_mv 2017-07-18T00:00:00Z
datacite.date.available.fl_str_mv 2017-08-31T12:42:25Z
datacite.date.embargoed.fl_str_mv 2017-08-31T12:42:25Z
datacite.rights.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
datacite.subjects.subject.fl_str_mv apadrinhamento civil
CPCJ
responsabilidades parentais
responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro
adoção restrita
datacite.titles.title.fl_str_mv A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Martins, João Zenha
Campos, Rita
RUN
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa
dc.date.Accepted.fl_str_mv 2017-07-18T00:00:00Z
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv 2017-08-31T12:42:25Z
dc.date.embargoed.fl_str_mv 2017-08-31T12:42:25Z
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10362/22998
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv por
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv apadrinhamento civil
CPCJ
responsabilidades parentais
responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro
adoção restrita
dc.title.fl_str_mv A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_bdcc
description The purpose of this Internship Report was to study the role of the Children’s Protection Commission in the civil godfathering and compare this institute with the parental responsibilities and the already revoked restrict adoption, to understand if there are advantages on creating this legal bind in comparison to the others and in which way. Were determined as advantages: the less demanding requirements; the easier way to dismiss the consent for the creation of this bind than it was for the restrict adoption and the easier way to revoke it, the fact that there aren’t any succession rights or last name changes; the benefits in terms of taxes, work absences and licenses for care and social benefits for the godparents. But the civil godfathering is not a stranger to criticism from the legal doctrine, being some of the censure: the discrimination of the godchildren in relation to the godparent’s children; the constant interaction that is required between the godparents and the godchild’s biological family which may lead to conflict and the contact permission that is given to the ex-godparents after the godfathering being revoked. Other problems exist, such as: the time that passes between the approval from the court of the godfathering compromise signed in the Children’s Protection Commissions and the extension of it when the compromise needs to return to them to be corrected and to be submitted to the court once again; the need to insert clauses minding alimony, visitation rights and limitations to the parental responsibilities, when the Commissions have no powers to decide and change them and also the lack of knowledge of the institute coming from it being in a different legal diploma, from the amount of cases that exist in each Commission and from the lack of legal technicians in these entities.
dirty 0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
format masterThesis
fulltext.url.fl_str_mv https://run.unl.pt/bitstreams/55f55af1-bddd-4f98-8a4b-af4db48a598e/download
id run_659e3d6d39b032cd4501e2b01f2ad71e
identifier.url.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10362/22998
instacron_str unl
institution Universidade Nova de Lisboa
instname_str Universidade Nova de Lisboa
language por
network_acronym_str run
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNL
oai_identifier_str oai:run.unl.pt:10362/22998
organization_str_mv urn:organizationAcronym:unl
person_str_mv Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa
publishDate 2017
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNL
repository_id_str urn:repositoryAcronym:run
service_str_mv urn:repositoryAcronym:run
spelling porpt_PTThe purpose of this Internship Report was to study the role of the Children’s Protection Commission in the civil godfathering and compare this institute with the parental responsibilities and the already revoked restrict adoption, to understand if there are advantages on creating this legal bind in comparison to the others and in which way. Were determined as advantages: the less demanding requirements; the easier way to dismiss the consent for the creation of this bind than it was for the restrict adoption and the easier way to revoke it, the fact that there aren’t any succession rights or last name changes; the benefits in terms of taxes, work absences and licenses for care and social benefits for the godparents. But the civil godfathering is not a stranger to criticism from the legal doctrine, being some of the censure: the discrimination of the godchildren in relation to the godparent’s children; the constant interaction that is required between the godparents and the godchild’s biological family which may lead to conflict and the contact permission that is given to the ex-godparents after the godfathering being revoked. Other problems exist, such as: the time that passes between the approval from the court of the godfathering compromise signed in the Children’s Protection Commissions and the extension of it when the compromise needs to return to them to be corrected and to be submitted to the court once again; the need to insert clauses minding alimony, visitation rights and limitations to the parental responsibilities, when the Commissions have no powers to decide and change them and also the lack of knowledge of the institute coming from it being in a different legal diploma, from the amount of cases that exist in each Commission and from the lack of legal technicians in these entities.application/pdfpt_PTA competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restritaDias, Catarina Miranda Soares da CostaMartins, João ZenhaCampos, RitaHostingInstitutionOrganizationalRUNe-mailmailto:run@unl.ptrun@unl.ptURNurn:tid:2017191692017-08-31T12:42:25Z2017-07-182017-07-18T00:00:00ZHandlehttp://hdl.handle.net/10362/22998http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2open accessapadrinhamento civilCPCJresponsabilidades parentaisresponsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiroadoção restrita1934354 bytesliteraturehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_bdccmaster thesishttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2application/pdffulltexthttps://run.unl.pt/bitstreams/55f55af1-bddd-4f98-8a4b-af4db48a598e/download
spellingShingle A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa
apadrinhamento civil
CPCJ
responsabilidades parentais
responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro
adoção restrita
Dias, Catarina Miranda Soares da Costa
apadrinhamento civil
CPCJ
responsabilidades parentais
responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro
adoção restrita
status NEW
subject.fl_str_mv apadrinhamento civil
CPCJ
responsabilidades parentais
responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro
adoção restrita
title A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
title_full A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
title_fullStr A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
title_full_unstemmed A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
title_short A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
title_sort A competência das CPCJ no apadrinhamento civil e comparação com a regulação do exercício das responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro e com a adoção restrita
topic apadrinhamento civil
CPCJ
responsabilidades parentais
responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro
adoção restrita
topic_facet apadrinhamento civil
CPCJ
responsabilidades parentais
responsabilidades parentais a favor de terceiro
adoção restrita
url http://hdl.handle.net/10362/22998
visible 1