Les romains furent sans doute les premiers à définir et codifier la curatelle des prodigues dans la loi des XII Tables en plaçant le prodigue en interdiction.La société d’Ancien Régime constitue un terreau idéal au développement de la prodigalité. En effet, les bourgeois comme les nobles souhaitent protéger leurs richesses de la voracité d’un héritier. L’antique interdiction pour cause de prodigalité est alors exhumée aux côtés d’autres dispositifs constituant ainsi un véritable arsenal mis à disposition des familles.La parentèle se montre impitoyable, usant parfois avec légèreté de l’une de ses dispositions à l’encontre de celui qui met en danger la pérennité du patrimoine familial. Avec la prodigalité, souvent associés à d’autres travers comme le jeu, la débauche, l’ivrognerie ou l’oisiveté, les modes de neutralisation deviennent des outils privilégiés non plus uniquement pour mettre un terme aux dépenses excessives mais également pour contrôler des attitudes qui dérangent l’ordre social sur lequel la société d’Ancien Régime repose. L’extension de l’interdiction aux veuves « follement » remariées à des personnes trop éloignées de leurs conditions (article 182 de l'ordonnance de Blois de 1579), indépendamment de toute prodigalité, en est une parfaite illustration.Malgré les modifications apportées à l'interdiction au cours de l'Ancien Régime, cette disposition porte en elle des vices rédhibitoires (coût et longueur de la procédure, caractère humiliant, difficulté de rapporter la preuve de la prodigalité, issue incertaine) qui conduiront les familles à s’en détourner. Ainsi, les excès des prodigues sont parfois jugulés par une séparation de biens entre mari et femme, une exhérédation officieuse, une substitution fidéicommissaire, une promesse de garder succession ou un enfermement.Les excès des familles sont dénoncés par les Lumières. Ainsi, le pouvoir royal encadre plus strictement certains dispositifs et les magistrats eux-mêmes rechignent à prononcer des interdictions pour de simples prodigues. Pour pallier à ce manque, ils sont à l’origine d’une disposition originale : le conseil judiciaire.Avec la révolution, la question se pose de savoir s’il faut intervenir dans les affaires du prodigue. En tout état de cause si mesure de neutralisation il y a, il faudra qu’elle respecte les libertés individuelles et le droit de propriété. Les travaux préparatoires du code civil révèlent, qu'après d'âpres débats, le prodigue continuera de bénéficier d'une protection juridique transposant dans le code la création jurisprudentielle du conseil judiciaire.Cette étude propose d'examiner les différentes techniques juridiques mises en place mais également les fondements qui ont innervé législation, activité juridictionnelle et doctrine. / It is difficult to categorize the concept of Prodigality: between madness, weakness of mind or a simple trait of character. The legislator hesitates not only about the solution to be adopted but also about the need to intervene.The Romans were undoubtedly the first to define and codify the curatorship of the prodigals in the law of the XII Tables by implementing the legal inability of the prodigal.The society of the Ancien Régime is a fertile ground for the development of prodigality. Indeed, both the bourgeoisie and the nobles wish to protect their wealth from the voracity of an heir. The former legal inability due to prodigality is then exhumed alongside other devices, constituting a real arsenal available to families.The relatives are ruthless, sometimes using very easily the legal measures at their disposal against the one who endangers the durability of the family inheritance. With prodigality, often associated with other failings such as gambling, debauchery, drunkenness or idleness, modes of neutralization become privileged tools not only to put an end to excessive spending but also to control attitudes that disturb the social order on which Ancien Régime society is based. The extension of the legal inability to "madly" remarried widows to persons too far from their social condition (article 182 of the Blois Ordinance of 1579), regardless of any prodigality, is a perfect illustration of this.Despite the changes made to the legal inability during the Ancien Régime, this provision has critical flaws (cost and length of the procedure, humiliating nature, difficulty in providing proof of prodigality, uncertain outcome) which will lead families to turn away from it. Thus, the excesses of the prodigals are sometimes curbed by a separation of property between husband and wife, an unofficial disinheritance , a fideicommissum , a promise to keep the succession or a confinement.The excesses of families are denounced by the Enlightenment. Thus, the royal power supervises certain devices more strictly and the magistrates themselves are reluctant to pronounce prohibitions for simple prodigals. To compensate for this lack, they are even at the origin of an original provision: the judicial council.With the Revolution, the question arose whether to continue interfering with the prodigal's affairs. In any case, if there is a neutralisation measure, it must respect individual freedoms and the right to property.After fierce debates, the preparatory work reveals that, the prodigal will continue to benefit from legal protection by transposing into the civil code the jurisprudential creation of the judicial council.This study will examine the different legal techniques available but also the foundations that have innervated legislation, jurisdictional activity and doctrine.

Quando o ato de consumir deixa de ser normal? A questão é muito antiga e antiga também é a resposta, bem como a consequência jurídica. Muito embora, hoje, discorrer sobre a normalidade seja tarefa inglória, no que toca ao consumo, argumenta-se ainda, gastar muito, desordenadamente, sem finalidade, como um louco, em resumo, deixa de ser normal. Quem assim procede é denominado pródigo e o direito, historicamente, reduz sua capacidade de agir. Mas seria o pródigo alguém que, deliberadamente, gasta o que é seu, gozando da liberdade sobre seus atos e bens, ou o faz em decorrência de doença mental? Seria, assim, essa redução de capacidade imposta pelo direito, mera ficção pautada em regras morais ou necessária medida de proteção? Diversas e sempre inconclusivas foram as respostas. Posto que, mesmo sem uma conclusão, o debate tenha cessado e a doutrina atual só faz repetir as reflexões inconclusas do passado, o presente trabalho retoma a discussão sobre essa figura ainda enigmática através de um enfrentamento interdisciplinar. Direito, psiquiatria, sociologia e economia devem ser observados de forma conjunta para que se possa entender a prodigalidade, seja pelo inafastável respeito às liberdades individuais, seja pelas novas descobertas no campo da psiquiatria, uma ciência recente, como a identificação sintomática de gastos exacerbados em algumas doenças como o transtorno bipolar, seja pela nova cultura da sociedade de consumo, que colocou ponto final aos valores experimentados pela geração passada, seja, ainda, em decorrência das políticas governamentais de incentivo ao consumo. Tudo isso a demonstrar, por fim, a necessária revisão do tratamento jurídico dado ao pródigo. / When the consuming act ceases to be normal? The question is very old and ancient is also the answer as well is the legal consequence. Although talk about normality is an inglorious task today, when the matter is consumption, it is argued that spend a lot, disorderly, without purpose, like a madman, in short, this is abnormal. Who acts in that way is called spendthrift and, historically, has ability to act reduced by the law. Is the spendthrift someone who deliberately spend what is his, enjoying the freedom of his actions and possessions, or act in this way because of a mental illness? So is this ability to act reduction imposed by law a mere fiction grounded in moral rules or a necessary protective measure? The answers were diverse and always inconclusive. Since the debate has finished even without a final conclusion and the current doctrine only repeats the inconclusive reflections of the past, the present work takes up the discussion of this still enigmatic figure through an interdisciplinary confrontation. Law, psychiatry, sociology and economics should be observed jointly so that one can understand the prodigality respecting to the irremovable individual freedoms, the new discoveries in the psychiatric field, a new science, as, for example, the extravagant spending like a symptom in some diseases such as the bipolar disorder, the new consumer society culture, which placed end to the values experienced by the previous generation, and the government policies to stimulate consumption. All with the goal of demonstrating the necessary revision of the spendthrift legal treatment.