伴随着司法能动的兴起,法院的职权行为也有所抬头。作为背景性因素且在中国具有长久历史的家父主义问题,是值得我们关注的。特别是在英文与中文中,家父主义具有贬义的事实,无疑会给当下受到官方支持的司法能动带来一些疑惑?正是在这种情形下,我们感到有必要在梳理家父主义理论的前提下,对诉讼过程中的一些具体家父行为进行分析。这样既能够防止法院以家父主义之名对当事人的自由随意剥夺与限制,又能够在正当性的条件下支持一些法院的家父行为。 Along with the rise of judicial initiative, the court’s authority and behavior also rise. The issue of patristicism, which has a long history as a background element in China, deserves our attention. Especially in English and Chinese, the fact that patrilinealism has a derogatory will undoubtedly bring some doubts about the judicial initiative now under the official support. It is in this context that we feel it necessary to sort out the theory of paternalism , Analysis of some specific behavior of the father during the proceedings. This will not only prevent the court from depriving and restraining the parties freely and freely in the name of paternalism, but also support the court’s fatherhood under the conditions of legitimacy.