Law. Human. Environment

Constitutional legal foundations of family policy: International comparative analysis

Zhyldyz Aitbaeva, Dinara Dzhunusova, Elena Atamkulova, Elmira Mamatazizova, Ravil Mazitov
Download article
Abstract

In the contemporary context of complex demographic crises and socio-economic challenges, the formulation of an effective family policy is a crucial component of state functioning and social stability. The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal constitutional legal frameworks for protecting family rights by establishing the relevance of modern recommendations for updating these national systems. The research employed a comparative-historical method, hermeneutic legal interpretation, and comprehensive analysis to evaluate regulations and legal frameworks. The investigation of legislation from France, Germany, China, and Kyrgyzstan helped to draw theoretical conclusions regarding real problems and successful practices in family policy, particularly concerning social support, migration adaptation, children’s rights, and gender equality. It was established that while European nations legally guarantee comprehensive economic support and mandated preschool infrastructure, approaches in China focus on stimulating fertility through targeted financial incentives and tax deductions. Furthermore, the legal landscape of Kyrgyzstan was investigated, and the following features were identified: a reliance on declarative constitutional guarantees that lack the necessary codified funding mechanisms and universal benefit systems to overcome specific challenges like migration and rural resource deficits. It was concluded that a successful family policy requires moving beyond broad declarations to implement concrete, universally accessible statutory mechanisms that harmonise international norms with distinct national socio-economic conditions. The findings and recommendations presented in this study can be utilised by policymakers, legislators, and social welfare developers to reform national family codes and design targeted, sustainable state support programs

Keywords

international law; family rights; rights protection; national legal systems; digitalisation of family policy

Suggested citation
Aitbaeva, Zh., Dzhunusova, D., Atamkulova, E. , Mamatazizova, E., & Mazitov, R. (2026). Constitutional legal foundations of family policy: International comparative analysis. Law. Human. Environment, 17(2), 78-96. https://doi.org/10.31548/law/2.2026.78
References
  1. Abulova, M.K. (2023). The concept of the family in modern society and its main tasks in the Republic of Uzbekistan. Journal of Pedagogical Inventions and Practices, 20, 47-51.
  2. Act of the Federal Republic of the Germany on the Parental Allowance and Parental Leave. (2015, January). Retrieved from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/beeg/BJNR274810006.html.
  3. Aitbaeva, Z., Asanbekova, D., Nurmamat kyzy, K., Uulu, Z.Z., Egemberdieva, N., Karabaeva, K., Osmonova, A., & Abdullaeva, Z. (2021). Certain problems of customary legal norms in family institutions and marriage relations. Open Journal of Political Science, 11(2), 234-241. doi: 10.4236/ojps.2021.112015.
  4. Akisheva, A. (2023). Women’s rights in the constitutional framework of Kyrgyzstan. In I. Spigno, V.R. Scotti & J.L.P. da Silva (Eds.), The rights of women in comparative constitutional law (pp. 227-246). London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781003349488-17.
  5. Amandossuly, B., Baizhomartova, K., Zhailau, Z., Nyssanbekova, L., & Otynshiyeva, A. (2025). Legal Challenges and Developments in the WTO Dispute Resolution Mechanism. Khazanah Hukum, 7(1), 46-60. doi: 10.15575/kh.v7i1.39633.
  6. Andrzejewski, M. (2021). Legal protection of the family: Essential Polish provisions regarding international legal standards and social change. In Family Protection from a legal perspective (pp. 151-190). Budapest: Central European Academic Publishing. doi: 10.54237/profnet.2021.tbblfl_5.
  7. Appendix to the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Kyrgyz Republic No. 254. (2025, May). Retrieved from https://cbd.minjust.gov.kg/30-170/edition/33648/kg.
  8. Atabekova, N.K., Urisbayeva, A.A., Kozhakhmetova, A.A., Uraimova, T.A., & Bolotbekova, E.K. (2023). Family policy as an integral component of state social policy: Contemporary challenges and responses through innovation. In E.N. Makarenko, N.G. Vovchenko & E.N. Tishchenko (Eds.), Technological trends in the AI economy: Smart innovation, systems and technologies (pp. 269-278). Singapore: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-7411-3_29.
  9. Barzó, T. (2021). Family protection in Central European countries. In Family protection from a legal perspective (pp. 287-322). Budapest: Central European Academic Publishing. doi: 10.54237/profnet.2021.tbblfl_9.
  10. Brini, E., Lenko, M., Scherer, S., & Vitali, A. (2021). Retraditionalisation? Work patterns of families with children during the pandemic in Italy. Demographic Research, 45, 957-972. doi: 10.4054/demres.2021.45.31.
  11. Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China. (2020, May). Retrieved from https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/21757.
  12. Code of the Kyrgyz Republic on Children. (2012, July). Retrieved from https://cis-legislation.com/document.fwx?rgn=53124.
  13. COFACE Families Europe. (2025). 2025 Insights on family policies – European observatory on family policy. Retrieved from https://coface-eu.org/2025-insights-on-family-policies-european-observatory-on-family-policy/.
  14. Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic. (2021, October). Retrieved from https://constsot.kg/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/constitution-of-the-kyrgyz-republic.pdf.
  15. Convention Concerning Equal Opportunities and Equal Treatment for Men and Women Workers: Workers with Family Responsibilities No. 156. (1981, June). Retrieved from https://www.ilo.org/media/27801/download.
  16. Convention Concerning the Revision of the Maternity Protection Convention (Revised) No. 183. (2000, May). Retrieved from https://www.ilo.org/media/27781/download.
  17. Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention). (2011, May). Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/gender-matters/council-of-europe-convention-on-preventing-and-combating-violence-against-women-and-domestic-violence.
  18. Council of the Baltic Sea States. (2026). Germany’s municipal networks support coordination between health and welfare sectors. Retrieved from https://cbss.org/practice/germanys-municipal-networks-support-coordination-between-health-and-welfare-sectors/.
  19. Cui, S., & Qi, P. (2021). The legal construction of personal information protection and privacy under the Chinese Civil Code. Computer Law & Security Review, 41, article number 105560. doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2021.105560.
  20. Dyson, E., Bermange, A., Aliga, D., Eijeman, N., Shrivastava, A., Karani, L., & Lievens, T. (2025). Generation 2050 in Central Asia. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/eca/ru/media/43176/file/Generation%202050%20RU.pdf.
  21. Efremov, A. (2025). Psychiatry in the context of changing cultural norms: Mental disorders among migrants and refugees. Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy, 35(4), article number 100544. doi: 10.1016/j.jbct.2025.100544.
  22. European Social Charter. (1961, October). Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/european-social-charter/charter-texts.
  23. Family Code of the Kyrgyz Republic. (2003, August). Retrieved from https://cis-legislation.com/document.fwx?rgn=4088.
  24. Federal Ministry for Education, Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth. (2025). Child Benefit (Kindergeld). Retrieved from https://www.bmfsfj.de/bmfsfj/themen/familie/familienleistungen/kindergeld/kindergeld-73892.
  25. Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth. (2012). Time for the family: Family time policy as an opportunity for sustainable family policy. Retrieved from https://www.bmbfsfj.bund.de/resource/blob/93208/0093eab6ddb6af15ec8d5a5e803ced8e/achter-familienbericht-kurzfassung-englisch-data.pdf.
  26. Giyasova, Z., Guliyeva, S., Azizova, R., Smiech, L., & Nabiyeva, I. (2025). Relationships between human development, economic growth, and environmental condition: The case of South Korea. Environmental Economics, 16(2), 73-83. doi: 10.21511/ee.16(2).2025.06.
  27. Government Offices’ Legal Databases. (1993). Retrieved from https://rkrattsbaser.gov.se/sfst?bet=1993:335.
  28. Grynchak, A.A., Tavolzhanska, Y.S., Grynchak, S.V., Smorodynskyi, V.S., & Latysh, K.V. (2022). Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms as a constitutional instrument of European public order. Public Organization Review, 23(2), 825-838. doi: 10.1007/s11115-021-00583-9.
  29. Grzywacz, J.G., Badahdah, A.M., & Abdelmoneium, D.A.O. (2019). Work family balance: Challenges, experiences, and implications for families. Doha: Hamad Bin Khalifa University Press. doi: 10.5339/difi_9789927137952.
  30. Hébert, C., Thumlert, K., & Jenson, J. (2020). Digital parents: Intergenerational learning through a digital literacy workshop. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(1), 34-91. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2020.1809034.
  31. Jailobaeva, K., Jailobaev, T., Baialieva, G., Ismanbaeva, R., Kirbasheva, D., & Adam, M.-A. (2023). Empowering parents and promoting school and teacher accountability and responsiveness: Case of Kyrgyzstan. International Journal of Educational Development, 103(1), article number 102899. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2023.102899.
  32. Kleven, H., Landais, C., Posch, J., Steinhauer, A., & Zweimüller, J. (2024). Do family policies reduce gender inequality? Evidence from 60 years of policy experimentation. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 16(2), 110-149. doi: 10.1257/pol.20210346.
  33. Kraljić, S. (2020). New family code and the dejudicialization of divorce in Slovenia. Balkan Social Science Review, 15, 157-177. doi: 10.1257/pol.20210346.
  34. Law of the Republic of Kyrgyzstan No. 184 “On State Guarantees of Equal Rights and Equal Opportunities for Men and Women”. (2008, August). Retrieved from https://cbd.minjust.gov.kg/202398/edition/382698/ru.
  35. Lui, L., & Cheung, A.K. (2021). Family policies, social norms and marital fertility decisions: A quasi‐experimental study. International Journal of Social Welfare, 30(4), 396-409. doi: 10.1257/pol.20210346.
  36. Lüth, L., & Zimmermann, K. (2024). The managerial family? Family care work in Germany and Spain. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 31(3), 480-501. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxae010.
  37. Melo, G., Valizadeh, P., & Nayga, R.M. (2023). Did mental and emotional health of SNAP families’ children improve during the COVID-19 pandemic? Preventive Medicine, 169, article number 107456. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2023.107456.
  38. Milano, R., Tamburlini, G., & Milani, P. (2025). Italy’s 0-6 reform: Balancing equity and innovation in early childhood education and care. Retrieved from https://coface-eu.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Insights-Italy-Website.pdf.
  39. Ministry of Labour and Social Development of the Kyrgyz Republic. (2023). Retrieved from https://mlsp.gov.kg/.
  40. Munif, W., Lainsamputty, N., & Hitimala, H. (2025). Book review: Children, the law and the welfare principle: Civil law perspectives from France and Germany. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 52(4), 666-668. doi: 10.1177/00938548251313967.
  41. NeJaime, D. (2019). The constitution of parenthood. Stanford Law Review, 72, 261-380. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3446018.
  42. Osmonova, D., Talgarbekova, E., Tashtanbekova, M., Moldoshova, A., & Anastassiadi, A. (2023). Evolution of family relationship in Kyrgyzstan. Social & Legal Studios, 6(4), 155-163. doi: 10.32518/sals4.2023.155.
  43. Poniatowski, M. (2022). Content of the right to parental responsibility in the case law of the european court of human rights. In Content of the right to parental responsibility: Experiences – analyses – postulates: Studies of the Central European professors’ network (pp. 13-35). Budapest: Central European Academic Publishing. doi: 10.54237/profnet.2022.pscrpr_2.
  44. Reeves, A., Loopstra, R., & Tarasuk, V. (2021). Family policy and food insecurity: An observational analysis in 142 countries. Lancet Planetary Health, 5(8), 506-513. doi: 10.1016/s2542-5196(21)00151-0.
  45. Ryskaliyev, D.U., Zhapakov, S.M., Apakhayev, N., Moldakhmetova, Z., Buribayev, Y.A., & Khamzina, Z.A. (2019). Issues of gender equality in the workplace: The case study of Kazakhstan. Space and Culture, India, 7(2), 15-26. doi: 10.20896/saci.v7i2.450.
  46. Shire, K.A., & Nemoto, K. (2020). The origins and transformations of conservative gender regimes in Germany and Japan. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 27(3), 432-448. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxaa017.
  47. Sobczyk, P. (2024). Constitutional foundations of family policy. In Demographic Challenges in Central Europe: Studies of the Central European Professors’ Network (pp. 199-227). Budapest: Central European Academic Publishing. doi: 10.54237/profnet.2024.tbdecce_7.
  48. Social Security Code of France. (2025, January). Retrieved from https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/texte_lc/LEGITEXT000006073189/2025-01-01.
  49. Stewart-Tufescu, A., Huynh, E., Chase, R., & Mignone, J. (2019). The life story board: A task-oriented research tool to explore children’s perspectives of well-being. Child Indicators Research, 12(2), 525-543. doi: 10.1007/s12187-018-9533-8.
  50. Thomas, M.J. (2019). Work, illumination and family: Revealing the motives for internal migration in Great Britain. Population, Space and Place, 25(4), article number e2233. doi: 10.1002/psp.2233.
  51. United Nations (UN) Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women. (1979, December). Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-elimination-all-forms-discrimination-against-women.
  52. United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child. (1989, November). Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child.
  53. Verga, C.M. (2024). The effective application of the rule of law by the member states of the European Union. In M. Tofan, I. Bilan & E.C. Rusu (Eds.), European financial resilience and regulation 25 years united under Euro – proceedings of the international conference EUFIRE-RE 2024 (pp. 393-411). Iași: Publishing House of the “Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iași.
  54. Wang, S., & Gong, S. (2023). Gender‐role preference matters: How family policy dissemination affects marriage/fertility intentions. Gender, Work & Organization, 31(6), 2351-2370. doi: 10.1111/gwao.12963.
  55. WHO. (2016). Action plan on sexual and reproductive health: Supporting the implementation of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development in Europe – leaving no one behind. Retrieved from https://www.ec-ec.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/WHO-Europe-Action-plan-SRH-2016-2030-RUSS-1.pdf.
  56. Zheng, G., & Shu, J. (2024). In the name of protection – a critical analysis of China’s legal framework of children’s personal information protection in the digital era. Computer Law & Security Review, 53, article number 105979. doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2024.105979.
  57. Zhu, P., Wu, Q., Waidley, E., Ji, Q., & Qian, M. (2023). Family resilience in a crisis: A qualitative study of family resilience in multimember infected families in the context of COVID-19. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 16(5), 741-748. doi: 10.1037/tra0001547.