婚姻之內與工作之外：家務分工與婚姻經濟弱勢的女性主義法律史考察（1945-2019）

2002年夫妻財產法律修正後，聯合財產制走入歷史，家務有酬的法律改革也取得自由處分金等成果，然而婚姻中家務分工與經濟處境已經性別平等了嗎？本論文探究法律如何再製婚姻經濟弱勢，以及性別與階級在其中的交織影響。本文欲突破既有法釋義學研究以家庭法為主的研究限制，除以民法夫妻財產之規範變遷為主軸，更納入各時期社會法、稅法相關議題與憲法解釋，更寬廣描繪婚姻作為經濟共同體的歷史轉型。時間上以1945年中華民國民法施行於臺灣為起點，1985年、2002年夫妻財產兩次重要修法時點為分期依據，2019年同性婚姻準用民法夫妻財產規範為終點，分為三時期。作者借助實質平等與多元交織性的理論觀點，重新評價「中性化」法律改革之成果與侷限。研究方法採取史料與文獻分析，以差異化的歷史敘事呈現女性群體內部差異，反思中產階級觀點之理想家庭圖像。首先探討促成1985年民法修法的多方論述與社會經濟脈絡之動態變化。1945年施行於臺灣之聯合財產制，符合立法者預設之理想家庭分工型態，造就妻子的經濟依賴處境。然而性別平等並非主要修法動力，由於夫債妻還案件形成審判上難題，故司法實務以維護交易安全為由，支持以登記名義為所有權判準之修法方向。本文進一步比較夫妻財產與空頭支票這兩類夫債妻還案件，指出司法實務選擇性否認／承認女性經濟能力之邏輯矛盾。儘管支持經濟獨立的新女性主義與社會輿論形成一定壓力，然而法律菁英主導之官方修法仍採取「改良」聯合財產方案。修法除帶來女性財產權的有限進步，實則擴大男性財產特權，試圖維繫傳統家務分工。 1985年修法後，下一時期法律改革面臨保障「經濟獨立」或「經濟共同」的方向拉鋸。本文藉由票據刑罰廢除、稅制爭議與婦運釋憲三個議題，分析婚姻共同體中不利女性、偏惠男性的內部效應。接著在離婚與夫妻財產議題交互影響的倡議與修法脈絡下，我挑選財產制之選擇、財產使用處分與保全措施、以及自由處分金三個議題，指出訴求經濟平等之法律改革存在種種限制：所得分配制延續剩餘財產分配請求權脫離家務勞動事實之缺陷；婚姻財產之使用與限制無法顧及女性內部差異，故未順利立法；以及自由處分金弱化為夫妻協議之零用錢，未能提高婚姻中女性之經濟獨立。因此儘管2002年獲得有限修法成果，仍難以改善離婚女性之經濟弱勢，不利於降低離婚門檻之倡議。為暸解經濟從屬地位如何延續至離婚後處境，本文納入社會救助相關法律，考察單親母職的理想標準與交織歧視。並指出低收入戶審查預設單親母親接受原生家庭與前配偶的經濟援助，形成不利門檻，以及特殊境遇婦女補助強調個人自立責任，強化就業與母職之衝突。 2002年修法廢除聯合財產制後，「婚姻綁財產」之共同體關係並未就此成為過去式，反而進一步轉型。本文從債權人代位以及保證契約這兩種配偶債務類型，分析婚姻債務的壓迫機制如何從「法律製造」轉為「自願承擔」。當「夫債妻還」中性化為「配偶債、配偶還」，「自由意願」與「個人選擇」的剩餘財產分配請求權與保證契約預設，則掩蓋了其中的階級與性別化樣貌。另一方面，當事人的抵抗則體現於努力脱離配偶債務的離婚案件，展現局部主體能動性。除此之外，法律改革亦帶來部分成果，考察家務勞動相關之法院判決，家務有酬與平等分工的立法價值在部分案件發揮影響，持家貢獻相當程度轉化為婚姻財產之分享，同時，法院亦擴大解釋「平等婚姻」之內涵，納入有限之經濟自由或要求協力貢獻。此時期亦展開社會保險相關改革，分別保障婚姻中與離婚女性。2008年國民年金保險開辦，改善了就業保險排除家庭主婦之問題，但低於勞保給付的不良體制仍延續就業身分之差別對待，形塑性別化與階級化的老年保障。而挑戰婚姻財產範圍的離婚配偶年金請求權，雖於公務人員法取得部分成果，形式平等的請求權設計卻產生不利職業婦女的性別化效應。上述促進女性經濟獨立的改革效果有限。除此之外，所得稅制雖修法解決婚姻懲罰問題，在強制合併申報機制下，仍因稅額計算與節稅考量，存在婚姻優惠集中男性之內部差別效應。2019年同性婚姻全面準用原有婚姻制度之財產相關規範，考察晚近婚姻平權的社會運動與立法論述，並未將家務分工與經濟保障視為核心議題。同婚運動以異性戀婚姻既有權利為爭取平權的參照，卻忽略了配偶權益兼具配偶特權的雙重面向。透過歷史考察，婚姻作為創造經濟不平等之機制，經歷了什麼樣的改變？本文發現，婚姻財產經歷中性化法律改革，雖然鬆動了部分男性經濟特權，但也「隱形化」性別不平等分工帶來的經濟優勢，並對不同處境的女性產生歧異影響。這使得現代型婚姻壓迫趨向隱微、辨識不易，宰制結構也從「法律強制」轉型為「個人選擇」。

關鍵字

女性主義法律史；家務有酬；夫妻財產；夫債妻還；法律與社會研究；法律動員

並列摘要

After the amendment of marital property law in 2002, joint property system has become history. The feminist legal reform has achieved some positive results, and the concept of “wages for housework” has been put into practice in marital property law. However, are housework division and economic condition equal based on marital status especially for women? This thesis focuses on how the law remolds marital economic subordination, and how gender and class are interweaved into and affect it. To break through the limit of current legal doctrinal study of marital property in family law, I also discuss the related social welfare law, tax law issues, and Judicial Yuan Interpretations (made by the Taiwan Constitution Court). In light of substantial equality and intersectionality theory, this study aims to revalue the gender-neutral legal reforms, present the interior differences of women, and introspect the ideal-family image of the middle-class. In the first period (1945-1985), I analyze legal discourses and social-economic contexts before the legal change in 1985. The joint property regime, as the default institution, constituted the economic subordination of wives, but gender equality was not the main force to amend the law. Because of hard cases of marital debts, the judiciary expressed support for the amendment for reasons of transaction security. Furthermore, I found the contradictions of judicial judgments between debt cases of marital property and overdue bill. In spite of the pressure from feminists and society, the legal elites were still for the new version of joint property. However, with limited progress, the legal amendment actually reinforced the male privileges and traditional division of housework. The dilemma of the second period (1985-2002) was whether women’s economic independence could be enhanced or not, conflicting with living together. First, I chose the following three issues, the abolishment of the bill penalty, controversies of tax law, and the leading case of marital property advocacy, to analyze the interior impacts within marriage. Second, in the context of divorce and marital property intertwined in the legislature agenda, I used three main issues of marital property to indicate the limits of the legal reform in 2002, failing to improve married women’s economic dependence. That was one of the reasons why the advocacy of no-fault divorce failed. Third, to understand the entangled discriminations upon single mothers, I examined social welfare laws and found unfavorable review standards and conflicts between motherhood and self-reliance. In the third period (2002-2019), after the abolishment of joint property, the legal doctrine of coverture is not dead but still exists in another way. I compare with the two kinds of cases of marital property debts, and suggest the dominant structure turn from “legal forces” into “personal choices.” The default of “free choice” in rights and contracts hides inequality of class and gender. Still, many women sue for divorce and show their partial agency. On the other side, the feminist legal reform has brought some changes. In selected court decisions, it is found that the contribution of housework has been recognized and the courts have broadened the interpretations of marriage equality. There were reforms in social security for married and divorced women but with limited progress. In 2008, the government started to practice the national pension system for unemployed people especially housewives. However, there is still a gap between the national pension and the employment insurance. The new civil servant law permits the claim for ex-spouse’s social security benefits, challenging the range of marital property, but on the other hand, the gender-neutral right puts the career women at a disadvantage in the reality. Besides, married couples have to report their income jointly by tax law, and in most cases, tax advantages are centered on the husbands as main earners, not the wives. Since “The Enforcement Act for Judicial Yuan No.748”（司法院釋字第748號解釋施行法）became effective on May 24, 2019, same-sex couples have gotten certain access to the substantive legal consequences of marriage. Examining the discourses of social movement and legislative debates, the division of housework was not one of the top issues. Same-sex Marriage proponents fought for the same rights of heterosexual marriage, but neglected the dimension of spouse privileges. What are the changes marriage has been through? This study found that the gender-neutral legal reform of marriage property has made part of male economic privileges loosed. However, the pattern of dominance caused by unfair division of household affairs still reproduces itself and has class impacts on women.