Feasibility Study of "Human Rights" as an Alternative to "Biological Ethics"
Akhlāq-i zīstī i.e., Bioethics Journal,
Vol. 10 No. 35 (1399),
1 Tir 2020
,
Page 1-15
https://doi.org/10.22037/bioeth.v10i35.29844
Abstract
Background and Aim: Today, bioethics and human rights are two sets of norms, procedures, and institutions whose primary function is to regulate the relationship between biology and medicine in the light of public law. In recent years, some studies, as well as the practice of some governments, have hypothesized that the field of biological ethics has been digested and absorbed in the human rights system. In the present study, we will examine the hypothesis that international human rights have now emerged as an alternative to biological ethics.
Materials and Methods: In this study, by analytical-descriptive method, the nature of biological ethics and its common principles with human rights will be discussed first. Once the status of the variable has been determined, the role of human rights in biological ethics will be considered in terms of sharing their foundations. In the third step, the hypothesis of "human rights as a substitute for biological ethics" will be tested, and finally the functions of international human rights in biological ethics will be discussed
Findings: Proponents of the hypothesis of the digestion of bioethics in the human rights system believe that due to the normative and institutional weaknesses of bioethics in the international legal-political-cultural space, international human rights instruments and institutions can digest the normative and institutional part of bioethics. The study's findings show that international human rights cannot cover all the gaps and gaps in the political science space. This is where the need for a space for biological ethics, which lacks the inherent characteristics of the world of law, and especially international human rights, is felt.
Ethical Considerations: In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed.
Conclusion: Biological ethics can play a role in cases where human rights are challenged flexibly. As a result, it is essential that not only is the field of biological ethics digested and absorbed in the human rights space, but that the two need to be completely independent of each other.
Cite this article as: Gholamali A. A Feasibility Study of "Human Rights" as an Alternative to "Biological Ethics". Bioethics Journal 2020; 10(35): e4.
- Human Rights; International Human Rights; Bioethics; Medical Law
How to Cite
References
Partington M. Introduction to the English Legal System 2019-2020. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019. p.16.
Cinelli L. Legal Positivism in a Global and Transnational Age. Dundee: Springer; 2019. p.90.
Article 1.1, Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights; 2005 (UDBHR).
McMillan J. The Methods of Bioethics: An Essay in Meta-Bioethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018. p.87-96.
Hauke R. Introduction: Crossing the Divides. In: Hauke R, Nathan E, Steven W. Philosophies and Sociologies of Bioethics: Crossing the divides. London: Springer; 2018. p.1-5.
Childress J. Public Bioethics: Principles and Problems. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2020. p.92.
Solinís G. Global Bioethics: What for?: 20st anniversary of UNESCO’s Bioethics Programme. New York: UNESCO; 2015. p.12-13.
Poli L. Bioethics, human rights and their interplay in the legal reasoning of ECtHR’s case law on artificial reproductive technologies. Federalismi.it - Focus Human Rights 2017; 13(1): 2-18.
Lunstroth J. Human Rights and Cultural Diversity in UNESCO Bioethics. In: Tham J, Kwan M, Garcia A. Religious Perspectives on Bioethics and Human Rights. Cham: Springer; 2017. p.25-37.
Holm S. Lost in Translation: Can we have a Global Bioethics without a Global Moral Language. In: Teays W, Renteln A. Global Bioethics and Human Rights: Contemporary Perspectives. New York: Rowman and Littlefield; 2020. p.64-72.
Rhodes R. The Trusted Doctor: Medical Ethics and Professionalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2020. p.12-13.
Garcia A. Convergence of Human Rights and Duties: Towards a Global Bioethics. In: Tham J, Kwan M, Garcia A. Religious Perspectives on Bioethics and Human Rights. Cham: Springer; 2017. p.59-74.
Pobjoy J. The Child in International Refugee Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2017. p.111-112.
Have H. Vulnerability: Challenging Bioethics. Hague: Routledge; 2016. p.169.
Robinson M. Human Rights in Global Health: Rights-Based Governance for a Globalizing World. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018. p.70-71.
Gielen J. Dealing with Bioethical Issues in a Globalized World: Normativity in Bioethics. London: Springer; 2020. p.3.
Liao M, O’Neil C. The Grounds of Ancillary Care Duties. In: Liao M, O’Neil C. Current Controversies in Bioethics. New York: Taylor and Francis; 2017. p.31-32.
Phillips A, Campos T, Herring J. Philosophical Foundations of Medical Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019. p.2-4.
Andorno R. A Human Rights Approach to Bioethics. In: Serna P, Seoane J. Bioethical Decision Making and Argumentation. New York: Springer; 2016. p.38-39.
Lindemann H. An Invitation to Feminist Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019. p.7.
Loike J, Fischbach R. Science-Based Bioethics. New York: Lulu; 2014. p.29-30.
Johnstone M. Bioethics: A Nursing Perspective. Melbourne: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2019. p.50-51.
Cruess R, Cruess S. Professionalism and professional identity formation: the cognitive base. In: Steinert Y, Cruess R, Cruess S. Teaching Medical Professionalism: Supporting the Development of a Professional Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2016. p.5-7.
Dieter B. Two Methods of Doing Bioethics. In: Studer H. Norms, Values and Society. London: Springer; 2013. p.176-177.
Koopman O. Science Education and Curriculum in South Africa. London: Springer; 2016. p.35-37.
Engelhardt H, Tristram J. Bioethics in the Plural: An Introduction to Taking Global Moral Diversity Seriously. In: Engelhardt H, Tristram J, Rasmussen L. Bioethics and Moral Content: National Traditions of Health Care Morality. London: Springer; 2013. p.1-14.
Reynolds J. The Governance of Solar Geoengineering: Managing Climate Change in the Anthropocene. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2019. p.110-111.
Katz C, Mueller J. A Guide to Global Mental Health Practice: Seeing the Unseen. New York: Routledge; 2015. p.47-49.
Yong C. Personal Data Protection and Privacy Law in Malaysia. London: Springer; 2013. p.16-17.
Smith G. Distributive Justice and the New Medicine. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2010. p.132-133.
Irving E. Multi-Actor Human Rights Protection at the International Criminal Court. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2020. p.24-25.
Plomer A. The Law and Ethics of Medical Research: International Bioethics and Human Rights. New York: Routledge; 2013. p.120-121.
Lenard P. Health Inequalities and Global Justice. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 2014. p.233-234.
Kälin W, Künzli J. The Law of International Human Rights Protection. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019. p.3-10.
Faunce T. Will international human rights subsume medical ethics? Intersections in the UNESCO Universal Bioethics Declaration. Journal of Medical Ethics 2005; 31(3): 173-178.
Goodman P, International Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013. Pp. 356-357.
Roberto A. A Human Rights Approach to Bioethics. In: Seoane J, Serna P. Bioethical Decision Making and Argumentation. London: Springer; 2016. p.31-41.
Fruzsina M. Integrating Ethical Standards into the Human Rights Framework. In: Braun M, Schickl H, Dabrock P. Between Moral Hazard and Legal Uncertainty: Ethical, Legal and Societal Challenges of Human Genome Editing. London: Springer; 2018. p.31-51.
Klabbers J, Palombella G. The Challenge of Inter-legality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2019. p.2-3.
Morth U. Soft Law in Governance and Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2004. p.6.
Senden L. Soft Law in European Community Law. London: Hart Publishing; 2004. p.112-113.
Robinson M. Human Rights in Global Health: Rights-Based Governance for a Globalizing World. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018. p.70-71.
Ilja P. Biomedical Research in Developing Countries and International Human Rights Law. In: Schildmann J, Sandow V, Rauprich O, Vollmann J. Human Medical Research: Ethical, Legal and Socio-Cultural Aspects. London: Springer; 2012. p.65-86.
Sotis C, Practical Reason and Enantiosemy of Human Dignity: The Reality of the Principle in Italy. In: Feuillet B, Orfali K, The Reality of Human Dignity in Law and Bioethics: Comparative Perspectives. London: Springer; 2019. Pp. 91-93.
Fenton E. Bioethics and Human Rights. In: Arras J, Fenton E. The Routledge Companion to Bioethics. New York: Routledge; 2015. p.73-74.
Huidu A. The Ethics of Embrionic Stem Cells Research: The Human Being in the Early Stages of Development - A "Medicine" or an End in Itself?. In: Sandu A, Frunza A, Unguru E. Ethics in Research Practice and Innovation. New York: IGI Global; 2019. p.244-263.
Haack S. Deviant Logic, Fuzzy Logic: Beyond the Formalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1974. p.3-12.
Klabbers J. The Concept of Treaty in International Law. London: Kluwer; 1998. p.157.
Klabbers J, Palombella G. The Challenge of Inter-legality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2019. p.2-3.
Wolff J. Postmodern Theory and Feminist Art Practice. In: Boyne R, Rattansi A. Postmodernism and Society. New York: Macmillan International Higher Education; 2017. p.187-208.
Popa L. Patterns of Treaty Interpretation as Anti-Fragmentation Tools: A Comparative Analysis with a Special Focus on the ECtHR, WTO and ICJ. London: Springer; 2018. p.59-60.
Ashcroft R. The Troubled Relationship Between Bioethics and Human Rights. In: Freeman M. Law and Bioethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008. p.31-41.
West K, Hunt S, Applegate E. Today's Medical Assistant: Clinical & Administrative Procedures, St. Louis: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2015. p.36-37.
Grzeszczak R, Muchel M. Provisional Measures Against EU Member States in the Light of the Bialowieza Forest Case. Eastern European Journal of Transnational Relations 2018; 2(1): 21-38.
Laurie G, Harmon S, Dove E. Mason and McCall Smith's Law and Medical Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019. p.43-45.
Papanikitas A. Crash Course Medical Ethics and Sociology Updated Edition. London: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2015. p.8-9.
Srinivasan U, Uddin S, A Social Network Framework to Explore Healthcare Collaboration. In: Information Resources Management Association, Healthcare Ethics and Training: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. Washington: IGI Global; 2017. Pp. 24-25.
Vauchez S. EU Law and Bioethics. In: Cremona M. New Technologies and EU Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018. p.69-70.
Atuire C. A Prolegomon to Bioethics in Africa: Issues, Challenges and Commonsensical Recommendations. In: Mansoh Y, Atuire C. Bioethics in Africa: Theories and Praxis. New York: Vernon Press; 2019. p.18-20.
Hellstadius A, Schovsbo J. You told me, Right? - Free and Informed Consent in European Patent Law. In: Minssen T, Herrmann R, Schovsbo J. Global Genes, Local Concerns: Legal, Ethical and Scientific Challenges in International Biobanking. London: Edward Elgar; 2019. p.104.
Pierre M. The Principle of Dignity and the European Court of Human Rights. In: Feuillet B, Orfali K. The Reality of Human Dignity in Law and Bioethics: Comparative Perspectives. London: Springer; 2019. p.145.
Blasimme A, Caminiti D, Vayena E. The regulation of human germline genome modification in Switzerland. In: Boggio A, Romano C, Almqvist J. Human Germline Genome Modification and the Right to Science: A Comparative Study of National Laws and Policies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2020. p.412.
Stasi A. Palladino, Advance Health Care Directives under European Law and European Biolaw. In: Negri S, Taupitz J, Salkić A, Zwick A. Advance Care Decision Making in Germany and Italy. London: Springer; 2013. p.39-81.
Mowbray A. Cases, Materials, and Commentary on the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. p.112.
Wittzack R. Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. In: Schmahl S, Breuer M. The Council of Europe: Its Law and Policies. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2017. p.586.
Sabatello M. Children's Bioethics: The International Biopolitical Discourse on Harmful Traditional Practices and the Right of the Child to Cultural Identity. London: Brill; 2009. p.209.
Cahn C. Human Rights, State Sovereignty and Medical Ethics: Examining Struggles around Coercive Sterilization of Romani Woman. London: Brill; 2014. p.177.
Yuko E. Ireland and the United Kingdom’s Approaches to Regulation of Research Involving Human Tissue. In: Lenk C, Sandor J, Gordijn B. Biobanks and Tissue Research: The Public, the Patient and the Regulation. London: Springer; 2011. p.175-176.
Vicente B. International Bioethics Committees: Conditions for a Good Deliberation. In: In: Serna P, Seoane J. Bioethical Decision Making and Argumentation. New York: Springer; 2016. p.141-143.
Yusuf A. Standard-setting in UNESCO. London: Brill; 2007. p.145.
Yaning Y. A Family-Oriented Confucian Approach to Advance Directives in End-of-Life Decision Making for Incompetent Elderly Patients. In: Ruiping F. Family-Oriented Informed Consent: East Asian and American Perspectives. London: Springer; 2015. p.258.
Mathieu C. Sources and Validity. In: Westerman P, Hage J, Kirste S, Mackor A. Legal Validity and Soft Law. London: Springer; 2018. p.76-77.
Sekalala S. Soft Law and Global Health Problems: Lessons from Responses to HIV/AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2017. p.248.
Bradley M, Sherwood A. Addressing and resolving internal displacement: Reflections on a soft law "success story". In: Lagoutte S, Hansen T, Cerone J. Tracing the Roles of Soft Law in Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2016. p.180-182.
- Abstract Viewed: 389 times
- pdf (فارسی) Downloaded: 108 times