Core Viewpoint - The Supreme Court of China has released eight typical cases related to domestic violence, emphasizing that domestic violence is a violation of personal rights and should not be considered merely a family dispute. The cases highlight the recognition of both physical and psychological abuse as forms of domestic violence [3][4]. Group 1 - Domestic violence is defined as illegal or criminal behavior that infringes on personal rights, regardless of whether it occurs inside or outside the home. Psychological abuse, such as humiliation and degradation, is also recognized as domestic violence [3][4]. - The Supreme Court emphasizes the importance of accurately assessing the characteristics of domestic violence cases and allows for expert testimony to aid in evidence evaluation. This includes cases where the victim's statements are central to the evidence chain [4]. - Special attention is given to the judicial protection of vulnerable groups, particularly minors, reinforcing the principle of maximizing the interests of minors in domestic violence cases [4].

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court of China has released eight typical cases related to domestic violence to enhance the implementation of the Anti-Domestic Violence Law and provide guidance on legal application, evidence recognition, and handling measures [1][3]. Group 1: Characteristics of Domestic Violence Cases - Domestic violence is not merely a family dispute; it includes psychological abuse, which is also considered domestic violence [1][2]. - Courts are encouraged to comprehensively assess the characteristics of domestic violence cases and may allow experts to provide assistance when necessary [2][3]. - Special attention is given to the judicial protection of vulnerable groups, particularly minors, emphasizing the principle of maximizing the interests of minors [2][3]. Group 2: Judicial Attitude and Responsibilities - The release of these cases demonstrates the court's commitment to safeguarding the rights of women and children and its zero-tolerance stance towards domestic violence [3]. - The courts play a crucial role in protecting victims, punishing perpetrators, and restoring social relationships [3]. Group 3: Typical Cases Overview - Case 1: Psychological abuse through continuous humiliation and degradation constitutes severe abuse, leading to a conviction for abuse [5][6]. - Case 2: The court recognized the influence of domestic violence on the victim's behavior and allowed expert testimony to clarify the psychological aspects of the case [10][11]. - Case 3: The court emphasized the need to accurately characterize the perpetrator's actions in light of domestic violence characteristics [14][15]. - Case 4: The victim's statements, which included non-knowable details, were deemed credible, leading to a conviction for sexual offenses [18][19]. - Case 5: The issuance of a protection order was facilitated through a one-stop collaborative intervention mechanism, highlighting the importance of community involvement [22][23]. - Case 6: The court ruled that violent discipline should be recognized as domestic violence, impacting custody decisions [27][28]. - Case 7: The court supported compensation for domestic labor and damages in divorce proceedings, ensuring financial protection for victims [32][33]. - Case 8: The court ruled that perpetrators of domestic violence should generally not have custody of minors, reflecting a protective stance towards children [37].

Core Viewpoint - The case highlights the complexities surrounding custody rights of stepchildren in divorce situations, emphasizing the importance of the child's wishes and the established emotional bonds with stepparents [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Framework - The court recognized that the relationship between stepparents and stepchildren is governed by the same rights and obligations as biological parent-child relationships, as per the Civil Code [2]. - The court's decision was influenced by the stable emotional connection formed over nearly eight years between the stepmother and the stepdaughter, which does not dissolve automatically upon divorce [2][3]. Group 2: Child's Best Interests - The principle of "maximizing the interests of minors" was central to the court's ruling, allowing for stepparents to continue custody if they are willing and able to provide a nurturing environment [3]. - The stepdaughter, having reached the age of fourteen, expressed a clear desire to remain with her stepmother, which was a significant factor in the court's decision [3]. Group 3: Emotional and Environmental Considerations - The court considered the emotional ties and the stable living environment that the stepdaughter had with her stepmother and half-sister, which were deemed beneficial for her mental and physical health [3]. - The ruling challenges the notion that stepchildren must automatically return to their biological parents after a divorce, reflecting a shift in legal perspectives on family dynamics [3].

Core Viewpoint - The case highlights the complexities of child custody disputes, particularly in situations where the biological and foster parents are in conflict, and emphasizes the importance of legal and financial safeguards for the child's welfare [1][3][4]. Group 1: Case Background - The child, referred to as Xiao Zhi, faced a custody battle after the death of his father, which led to the re-emergence of his biological mother, Yang, who sought to reclaim custody despite Xiao Zhi's attachment to his foster mother, Wang [1]. - Following the father's accidental death, Xiao Zhi received a compensation of 700,000 yuan, which became a focal point in the custody dispute [1]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings and Mediation - The court initiated a deep social investigation and psychological intervention to understand Xiao Zhi's needs and feelings, leading to a mediated meeting between the parties involved [1][3]. - During the mediation, Wang expressed her willingness to care for Xiao Zhi but was concerned about her lack of legal status and financial security [3]. Group 3: Resolution and Safeguards - An agreement was reached where Yang retained legal custody while delegating actual care to Wang, who agreed to forgo care fees and assist with visitation rights [3]. - A regulatory framework was established to manage the 700,000 yuan compensation, involving multiple local government departments to ensure transparency and proper use of funds for Xiao Zhi's upbringing [3][4]. - The case serves as a model for protecting children's interests in similar custody disputes, showcasing a systematic approach to safeguarding minors' welfare [4].