家庭教育既是作为私人领域家庭的功能之一，也是一个社会关注的公共话题。我国父母家庭教育能力与我国家庭发展能力之间的要求还有很大差距，基于父母自身教育能力的局限以及社会变迁导致的对家庭教育的压力，亟需对家庭教育提供支持与帮助。作为公民权利保障者的政府，如何回应民众的需求，该不该介入家庭教育，介入的限度如何，如何规范政府与家庭教育的关系？本文运用文献法、文本分析法、比较法、法解释法、调查研究法对家庭教育政府职责的立法问题作了较为深入的分析。论文分析了家庭教育政府职责的逻辑起点，即家庭教育的公共性问题，并系统阐述了家庭教育的政府职责体系及其内容，最后提出了家庭教育政府职责的立法建议。 家庭教育政府职责的逻辑起点是家庭教育的公共性，儿童独立权利主体地位的确立、国家对于合格公民培养的需要、儿童现有平等受教育权的要求表明家庭教育具有公共性。公共性是家庭教育与政府职责的契合点，家庭教育的公共性要求政府积极介入家庭教育。同时，基于父母与子女之间关系的生物性基础、家庭促进儿童社会化功能的考量以及基于家庭自治的文化价值多元化，家庭教育具有私人性，它构成了对家庭教育政府职责的限定，表明政府介入家庭教育并不是没有限制的。政府是家庭教育的支持者、监督者，政府帮助提升父母的家庭教育能力，与社会共同参与提供家庭教育服务。 家庭教育服务的公共性与政府的公共性是政府向父母提供家庭教育服务的契合点。基于公共性，政府负有为家庭教育提供支持和服务的职责。政府作为家庭教育服务者的角色定位，也是尊重家庭教育私人性的体现。政府作为家庭教育公共服务的供给者，其提供与生产的角色是分离的，政府并不是家庭教育公共服务的唯一提供者。政府可以直接提供家庭教育公共服务，既可以通过政府设立的机构为未成年人父母提供家庭教育服务，也可以以购买的形式间接提供家庭教育公共服务，主要是通过向社会教育机构、学术团体、大众媒体、社会志愿组织和民办家庭教育机构购买家庭教育公共服务。由政府、社会与市场等多主体来供给家庭教育公共服务，也是保障家庭教育公共性，避免政府作为唯一主体提供家庭教育服务导致政府对家庭教育私人性的侵犯。政府购买家庭教育公共服务的形式主要有公私合作、直接财政资助与间接财政资助等。作为家庭教育公共服务的提供者，政府要建立相应的组织机构负责对家庭教育的服务工作，并通过一定的财政投入和制度来予以保障。 家庭教育服务的公共性，不但对政府直接提供家庭教育服务的公共性提出了要求，也对社会提供家庭教育服务提出要求，即家庭教育服务的公共性从政府扩散到社会主体中。政府作为家庭教育公共服务的供给主体，在家庭教育公共服务的多元供给体系中起主导作用，确保家庭教育服务公共性的实现。政府通过规划、财政、信息等手段发挥引导作用，形成充分的家庭教育供给市场，这是家庭教育服务公共性的基础。家庭教育供给市场会存在公共性流失现象，政府通过设定家庭教育公共服务机构的准入与退出机制、确立家庭教育专业人才制度、监督家庭教育公共服务行为、购买家庭教育公共服务行为、建立健全家庭教育公共服务绩效评价制度等来保障社会参与家庭教育服务公共性的实现。 家庭教育的公共性，还体现在作为家庭教育对象儿童的公共性。基于父母权利与儿童权利的分离性、父母权利的义务性以及体现儿童最大利益的国家亲权制度，政府有责任监督父母家庭教育行为。政府可以通过设定父母资格制度来进行监督，为了保障家庭教育的私人性，尊重父母的教育权利，应该为父母设定最基本的行为规范，父母应该接受家长教育，设定父母家庭教育惩戒权的程度、方式及必要的范围，逾越必要程度、方式与方位范围，则需承担相应民事、刑事责任。有必要通过父母教育、监护权剥夺，刑事责任等手段予以保障父母的教育能力。政府应该规定监护人的家庭教育职责、建立监护监督机构，完善不履行家庭教育职责监护人的惩戒制度，建立政府监护人制度，剥夺严重失职监护人的监护权。 家庭教育私人性决定了家庭教育权利的私权利性质。父母具有教育子女的自然道德基础、父母教育权优先于国家教育权、父母亲子关系的本质决定了家庭教育权利作为父母教育权利的一部分，是一种私权利。家庭教育权利的私权利性质，表明父母是家庭教育的首要负责人，政府不能侵害父母的家庭教育权利，同时保护家庭教育权利免受第三方侵害。政府负有保护家庭教育权利的职责，这一职责可以通过立法、行政、司法等形式予以实现。 我国已经确认了家庭教育的家庭主体责任，但促进家庭教育的实施主要依靠政府行政力量，政府提供家庭教育公共服务能力不足；政府作为供给主体，供给渠道单一，多元化的社会参与家庭教育服务机制尚未建立；政府对父母教育行为的监督职责已经确立，但是还不健全；平衡家庭与国家利益的关系还处于进一步调整之中。造成我国家庭教育政府职责缺失的制度性成因包括家庭教育政府职责目标的模糊性、家庭教育政府职责的落实性规定缺失、家庭教育政府职责间的划分不明晰、家庭教育政府职责实现形式还不完善、家庭教育的政府职责缺乏责任保障。因此应该通过立法手段对我国家庭教育的政府职责予以规范。家庭教育政府职责立法可对政府起到确权、限权与控权、赋权与促责作用。家庭教育政府职责立法规范包括对公民受家庭教育权利、政府对家庭教育的职责、家庭教育的财政投入、组织机构与人员配置、政府履职绩效评估、政府履职的监督与问责作出规定。我国应该采取软法和硬法的混合法律规制方式，对政府职责一方面作出硬性规定，另一方面应该培育法治观念，以纲要、指导文件的形式促进政府积极履职。在我国，家庭教育立法存在中央立法与地方立法路径，地方家庭教育立法应该避免同质化现象，使家庭教育立法能够适应地方需求、体现地方特点。

Family education is not only one of the functions of the family as a private sphere, but also a hot issue of social concern. There is still a big gap between the family education ability of our parents and the family development ability of our country. As a guarantor of civil rights, how does the government respond to the needs of the people? Whether the government should intervene in family education? What are the limits of the involvement of the government ?And how does the government regulate the relationship between the government and family education? This dissert analyze in depth the legislation of government responsibility for family education using the methods of literature, text analysis, comparison, legal interpretation and social investigation.This dissert analyze the logical starting point of the government responsibility for family education, that is, the publicity of family education. Based on the analysis of the publicity of family education, this dissert systematically expounds the system of government responsibility for family education and its content, and puts forward legislative suggestions on the government responsibility for family education. The logical starting point of the responsibility of family education is the publicity of family education. On one side,The establishment of the subject status of children's independent rights, the need of cultivating of qualified citizens for the state, and the demand for the equal right to education show that family education is also public.Publicity is the conjunction of family education and government responsibility.Publicity of family education requires active involvement of government into family education.On the other side,Based on the biological basis of the blood relationship between parents and children, the consideration of the family's function in promoting children's socialization and cultural value pluralism based on family automany, family enjoys autonomous status as a traditional private sphere.The privacy of family education constitutes the limitation of the government's responsibility for family education, indicating that the government's involvement in family education is not unlimited.The government should be the supporter and supervisor of family education, help improve parents'ability of family education, and participate in family education service with society. The publicity of family education service and the publicity of the government are the coincidence of the government providing family education service to parents. On the basis of publicity, the government has the responsibility of providing support and service for parents. The role of the government as a family education service provider is also a reflection of respecting for the private nature of family education. As the supplier of family education public service, the role of government in providing and producing is separated. The government is not the only provider of family education public service. The government can directly provide family education public services, either through government-established institutions to provide family education services for parents of minors, or indirectly provide family education public services in the form of purchasing from social education institutions, academic organizations, mass media, social voluntary organizations and private sector. Providing family education public service by government, society and market is also to ensure the publicity of family education and avoid the government's infringement on the private nature of family education. The main forms of government purchasing family education public services are public-private cooperation, direct financial assistance and indirect financial assistance. As the provider of family education public service, the government should take charge of the government's family education service by setting up corresponding organizations and certain financial input and system. The publicity of family education service not only demands the publicity of the service provided directly by the government , but also demands the service provided by the society. That is the publicity of family education service diffusing from the government to the social subject. As the main supplier of family education public service, the government plays a leading role in the multi-supply system of family education public service, ensuring the realization of the publicity of family education service. The government plays a guiding role through planning, financing, informing and other means to form an adequate supply market for family education, which is the basis for the publicity of family education services. There will be a public drain in the supply market of family education. In order to regulate the multiple supply of family education public services, the government should establishe the admission and withdrawal mechanism of family education public service institutions, establishe the system of family education professionals, supervise the behavior of family education public service, purchase the behavior of family education public service, establish and improve the performance evaluation of family education public service. The publicity of family education is also reflected in the publicity of children. Based on the separation of parental rights from children's rights, the obligation of parental rights and the national parental rights system which embodies the best interests of the child, the government has the responsibility to supervise parental family education. The government can supervise the parents’ behavior by setting up the parental qualification system. In order to protect the private nature of family education and respect the parents'right to education, the government should set the most basic norms of behavior for parents. Parents should receive parental education.The government should set the degree, mode and necessary scope of the power of punishment of parents.Those goes beyond the norm must bear civil and criminal responsibilities.Therefore, it is necessary to protect parents' educational ability by means of parental education, deprivation of guardianship and criminal responsibility. The government should stipulate the guardian's family education responsibility, establish guardianship supervision institutions, improve the disciplinary system of guardians who fail to fulfill their family education responsibilities, establish a government guardian system, and depriveguardians of guardianship who is severely derelict . The private nature of family education leads to the private right nature of family education rights. Parents having the natural moral basis to educate their children, parents'right to education taking precedence over the state's right to education, and the nature of parent-child relationship determines that the right to family education, as a part of parents' right to education, is a kind of natural right. The private right nature of family education shows the fact that parents are the primary responsible persons for family education.The government should not infringe on parents'right to family education, while protecting the right to family education from third parties. The government has the responsibility to protect the right of family education, which can be realized through legislation, administration and justice. China has affirmed that the family should assume the responsibility of family education, but it mainly depends on the administrative power of the government to promote the implementation of family education. There is insufficient in providing family education public services by the government. As the main supplier, The supply channel of public service by the government is single and diversified. The mechanism of social participation in family education service has not yet been established. The government's responsibility to supervise parents'educational behavior has been established, but it is still not sound. The balance between family and national interests is still in the process of further adjustment.The institutional causes of the absence of government responsibilities for family education in China include the ambiguity of the objectives of government responsibilities for family education, the absence of implementing regulations for government responsibilities for family education, the unclear division of government responsibilities for family education, the imperfection of the forms for fulfilling government responsibilities for family education and the absence of government responsibilities for family education. Therefore, the government responsibility of family education should be standardized in China through legislation. The legislation on government responsibility of family education can play a role in determining, restricting, controlling, empowering and promoting the government. Legislative norms of government responsibility for family education include affirming the right of citizens to receive family education, the responsibility of the government for family education, financial investment in family education, organization and staffing, performance evaluation of government performance, supervision and accountability of government performance. There should adopt the mixed legal regulation mode of soft law and hard law. On the one hand, the government's duty should be stipulated rigidly. On the other hand, the concept of rule of law should be cultivated and the government should be promoted to perform its duty actively in the form of outline and guidance document. In China, there are central and local legislative paths in family education legislation. Local family education legislation should avoid homogenization, so that family education legislation can adapt to local needs and reflect local characteristics.