Re-defining the human embryo A legal perspective on the creation of embryos in research (original) (raw)
Related papers
Is the human embryo legally defined and protected? Causes and consequences
Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law", states the article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights (1950). This article guarantees the protection of life of all persons. The human embryo, however, does not seem to be under the protection of this article, or, at least not always. The human embryo does not have a nature clearly defined and it is not considered always as person. The law protects only two categories by its ordinary regulations: things and persons. Our main objective is to find out if the human embryo is or not protected, according to the legal framework in Romania. The purpose of the paper is: (1) to familiarize professionals with current debate on the status of the human embryo; (2) to provide main legal standards and regulations concerning this specific area with examples from case reports;
The legal status of the human embryo
Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 2007
The contribution attempts to clarify the legal status of the human embryo according to basic principles of law by taking the German law as a model. Two decisions of the German Constitutional Court on abortion stipulate a constitutional right to life for every individual embryo. This inclusive interpretation of the respective articles of the German Constitution yields a principled verdict on elective abortions: according to the court, they are 'illegal, albeit not punishable'. A closer analysis, however, reveals that this ruling exhibits a self-destructive contradiction. It is shown that due to fundamental requirements of the validity of norms of law, elective abortions are legal under German law, regardless of how they are labelled. This true (as opposed to the merely alleged) legal situation is incompatible with a constitutional right to life of embryos. Hence, the question whether the ordinary law statutes regulating a comprehensive prohibition of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and of embryo research in Germany should be amended is not prejudiced by constitutional law. Ethical analysis shows that the protective duty we owe to early human embryos does not belong in the realm of the 'do no harm' principle, but corresponds to a prima facie duty of solidarity. This weak 'positive' obligation is amplified by considerations pertaining to the protection of the fundamental texture of our basic normative institutions. However, it can be outweighed by the conflicting obligations that society has vis-à-vis born human persons.
[2023] The necessity to reexamine the definition of the human embryo adopted by the CJEU
Family Forum, 2023
In 2022, several publications have appeared which require legal and ethical reflection. These are the works of Sheng Ding, Magdalena Żernicka Goetz, Jacob Hann, and Vincent Pasque. They concern two methods of obtaining mammalian embryos without the use of an ovum. One is reprogramming, "going back" to the state of totipotency (zygote). The second one is self-organization into the organism of cells from which it seemed, until 2022, that any cells of the organism could arise, but not the organism or the teratoma. In the second case, the embryos have reached the stage that previously required implantation into the uterus. We propose to reconsider the CJEU embryo definition in an attempt to avoid the instrumental use of human embryos because the current definition is likely to be used for that purpose , especially by means of the article presented by the Sheng Ding team. The authors of this letter (biotechnologist and bioethicist) have doubts concerning the legal status of human embryos, which can probably be obtained after using the data from these publications (1-4). These doubts result from the fact that the reports that are currently reaching the world of science in connection with the above-mentioned research, demonstrate that it is theoretically possible to create human embryos that will not be properly protected by law. The most controversial studies have been conducted on animals. Nonetheless, the project to commence the production of human embryos, for the purpose of using them as 3D-printing organs (albo 3D-printed organs) has already been
Some Remarks on the Legal Status of Human Embryo
Kutafin University Law Review, 2019
There is no unitary position towards the legal status of the embryo in Europe. Most International law acts discard the possibility of recognizing an absolute right to life to an embryo or foetus. The European Court of Human Rights had several occasions to express itself on this question, but has always avoided giving a clear opinion and leaves open the question whether Art.2 ECHR also covers life before birth. In the recent Parillo case it has been noted that it raises sensitive moral and ethical issues with a wide margin of appreciation for the States. Although there is no European consensus on the subject, it seems that in 21st century human embryo begins to enjoy a gradual protection and in some situations the law acknowledges some rights corresponding to it.
Reproductive biomedicine online
The use of the embryo in research into birth defects, infertility and the possible therapeutic value of embryonic stem cells, has given rise to vigorous discussion of the ethical, moral and legal status of the embryo. This paper considers the parliamentary debate that surrounded the passing of legislation in the UK in 2000 governing the use of the embryo in research. Underlying disagreement by members of Parliament as to whether embryo research was permissible, were considerable differences regarding when life was thought to begin--whether at the moment of fertilization of the egg, or whether after 14 days, at the time of the beginnings of cell differentiation, and the point after which the embryo can no longer split to form twins. Those who favoured the latter view argued that, while the conceptus might possess a unique genetic formula, it had only the potential for life before 14 days, the development of human life being a gradual and continuous process. They considered it mistake...
Rethinking Human Embryo Research Policies
The Hastings Center Report, 2021
It now seems technically feasible to culture human embryos beyond the “fourteen‐day limit,” which has the potential to increase scientific understanding of human development and perhaps improve infertility treatments. The fourteen‐day limit was adopted as a compromise but subsequently has been considered an ethical line. Does it remain relevant in light of technological advances permitting embryo maturation beyond it? Should it be changed and, if so, how and why? What justifications would be necessary to expand the limit, particularly given that doing so would violate some people's moral commitments regarding human embryos? Robust stakeholder engagement preceded adoption of the fourteen‐day limit and should arguably be part of efforts to reassess it. Such engagement could also consider the need for enhanced oversight of human embryo research. In the meantime, developing and implementing reliable oversight systems should help foster high‐quality research and public confidence in it.
A RIGHT TO HEALTH PERSPECTIVE ON EMBRYO RESEARCH: SYNERGIES, GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES ABSTRACT: The significant progress made in biology research has revealed the key role of human stem cells in the discovery of medical treatments. What has emerged, in particular, is the revolutionary capability of human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) to differentiate into any other specialised cell of the human body. The capability to be pluripotent makes these cells as an essential and invaluable resource for both the analysis of the embryos themselves and the discovery of new therapies for untreated diseases. However, because hESCs are derived from the inner mass of a blastocyst -a very early embryo -some ethical concerns arise about the need to destroy a human embryo to extract the cell lines. In some States, including Italy, such concerns have led to legal restrictions at the national level, such as the absolute ban to donate supernumerary embryos left over after fertility treatments and no more intended for implantation, for research purpose. Attention is dedicated to the relevant synergies and worrying gaps that exist between embryo research and the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health. The final goal is to identify potential opportunities to maximise the benefits of scientific progress and ensure compliance between embryo research and the right to health. It is worth noting that, although the right to the benefits of science and its applications and the right to life are addressed throughout the research, this work primarily focuses on the right to health.
The ambiguity of the embryo: ethical inconsistency in the human embryonic stem cell debate
Metaphilosophy, 2007
"We argue in this essay that (1) the embryo is an irredeemably ambiguous entity and its ambiguity casts serious doubt on the arguments claiming its full protection or, at least, protection against its use as a means for stem cell research, (2) those who claim the embryo should be protected as ‘‘one of us’’ are committed to a position even they do not uphold in their practices, (3) views that defend the protection of the embryo in virtue of its potentiality to become a person fail, and (4) the embryo does not have any rights or interests to be protected. Given that many are willing to treat the embryo as a means in other practices, and that human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research holds great potential to benefit many people, one cannot but conclude that hESC research is permissible and, because of its immense promise for alleviating human suffering, even obligatory."
From the time that James Thomson and colleagues (1998) fi rst announced the successful derivation of human embryonic stem cell (hESC) lines, there has been a heated debate about the ethical acceptability of hESC research because this research entails the destruction of human embryos (see Prainsack et al., 2008a). In an effort to quell this debate, governments, quasi-governmental organizations, and professional organizations around the world have sought to develop ethical standards for embryo research and hESC research, and to entrench these standards in laws or research guidelines. Together, these many and varied ethical and legal standards for embryo research and hESC research currently shape the fi eld of stem cell science. Their importance can be measured by the fact that scientists consider these standards In an effort to quell ongoing debate about the ethics of human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research, there have been concerted efforts to develop ethical standards for both emb...