Jurisprudence-Legal Consideration of Single-Status Childbearing Jurisprudence-Legal Consideration of Single-Status Childbearing
International Journal of Medical Toxicology and Forensic Medicine,
Vol. 10 No. 3 (2020),
27 September 2020
Background: Among the achievements of modern fertility technologies available to contemporary humans, we could mention the freezing technique to fertility preservation, and subsequently, unmarried childbearing. The only way for having children was having sexual intercourse with the opposite gender in the past years; however, with the advent of this technology, even without such a relationship, it is possible to have a child. This process could be termed unmarried childbearing or single-status fertilities. This is one of the resent subjects in medical fertility; however, there is no research in this field, in Iran.
Methods: This was an applied and theoretical research in the theology field; thus, no research material was implemented. The main method of this research was the bookcase approach.
Results: In countries such as the USA, UK, and Australia, where there are more coherent laws about employing modern fertility techniques, this issue is addressed and specific laws exist in this regard. However, despite widespread use of this technique in Iran, we have no law in this respect except for the Fetal Donation Act of 2003, which only covers the general issues. In other words, the social fertility mandate has remained silent given permission, prohibition, and its conditions and effects on the child lineage in Iran’s laws. Freezing gametes is practiced in our country for a wide range. Besides, single-status fertility is occurring worldwide.
Accordingly, this seems to be among the problems facing our society, and may also be illegally conducted in some cases, in Iran. In Islamic law, the permissible instances of reproductive rights include births through marriage, not otherwise, as well as births employing reproductive aids in terms of meeting the Islamic law. On the other hand, some individuals believe that this case can be regarded as some kind of inoculation with the involvement of a donor agency, and some jurists have voted to allow it. Therefore, these jurists explicitly accepted the use of donor gamete in the form of marital relations. The legislature of the Islamic Republic of Iran also emphasizes on donation to lawful couples in the law of donation approach. Therefore, using donated gametes for childbearing is excluded in singles. Additionally, Judaism and all branches of Christianity, except for the liberal protestant denomination prohibit unmarried childbearing. While the approach to the issue differs from one country to another, the USA Supreme Court has recognized and protected free relationships, family formation, and decisions on births, as freedom rights. The UK law has subjected the provision of services to single women to the welfare of children resulting from the process. However, in France, the provision of infertility treatment services to single individuals is prohibited. According to Australia law, any single or heterosexual individual without receiving medically-assessed services, i.e., referred to as ‘‘clinically infertile’’ cannot use this technology for having children.
Conclusion: In some countries, like the USA, bearing a child at a single status is legal; however, in some other regions, like the UK and Australia, it is permitted under special conditions. In some countries, like France, this action is prohibited. There is no law about this matter in Iran. The 167 article of the constitution addresses considering the Islamic verses and narrations on preserving the destination of the generation or acquiring the benefits and disposing of the corruption. In conclusion, the only way to have a child and to realize the principle of reproduction is permitted in the framework of religious marriage; thus, bearing a child at a single status is illegal and prohibited, in Iran.
- Modern fertility technologies, Single-Status fertility, Gamete donor, Child welfare
How to Cite
Batty LP. Assisted reproductive technology: The Aotearoa/Newzeland policy context. [MA Thesis]. Upper Riccarton: University of Canterbury; 2002. http://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/handle/10092/912
Revelli A, Molinari E, Salvagno F, DellePiane L, Dolfin E, Ochetti S. Oocyte cryostorage to preserve fertility in oncological patients. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2012; 2012:525896. [DOI:10.1155/2012/525896] [PMID] [PMCID]
Gracia C, Jeruss J. Lives in the Balance: Women with cancer and the right to fertility care. J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31(06):668-9. [DOI:10.1200/JCO.2012.47.5798] [PMID] [PMCID]
American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Age and fertility: A Guide for Patient America [Internet]. 2012 [Updated 2014 Aug 01]. Available from: https://www.reproductivefacts.org/globalassets/rf/news-and-publications/bookletsfact-sheets/english-fact-sheets-and-info-booklets/Age_and_Fertility.pdf
Mahmoodian N. [Jurisprudential consideration concerning fertility preservation by Gamete Cryopreservation method (Persian)]. Tehran: Nashre Hoghoghi; 2020.
Fazl Allah SMH. [Al-Masael al-Feghheyeh. 1st ed (Arabic)]. Beirut: Dar al-Etesam; 1995.
Sunderam S, Kissin DM, Crawford SB, Folger SG, Boulet SL, Warner L, et al. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance - United States, 2015. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2018; 67(3):1-28. [DOI:10.15585/mmwr.ss6703a1] [PMID] [PMCID]
Hor Ameli Z. [Vasael al-Shieh. 4th ed (Arabic)]. Tehran: Eslamiyyeh; 2018.
Ghortobi M. [Al-Jamea al-Ahkam al-Qoran (Arabic)]. Beirut: Dar al-Ahya al-Taras al-Arabi; 1984.
Tabatabai SMH. [Al-Mizan. 1st ed (Arabic)]. Beirut: Al-Alami Lelmatbooat; 1996.
Mahmoodian N. [Jurisprudential consideration concerning fertility preservation by Gamete Cryopreservation method. (Persian)] Feghh J. 2017-2018; 9(32-33):23-39. https://www.magiran.com/paper/1930439?lang=en
Tofigh Attar A. [Dor al-eslam fi tatoor al-ghanoon al-arabi al-ghadim (Arabic)]. Al-Azhar J. 2010; 41(1):121-49.
Campbell CS. Cloning human beings: Religious perspectives on human cloning [Internet]. Available from: https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/nbac/pubs/cloning2/cc4.pdf
Küng H. [Women in Christianity (Persian)]. Qom: Publicationof Religions and Legal Schools University; 2010. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/37773811
Wikipedia. Religious response to assisted reproductive technology [Internet]. 2020 [Updated 2020 Sep 21]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_response_to_assisted_reproductive_technology
Saed M. [Crimical law and human cloning (Persian)]. Tehran: Research Center of Medical Ethics and Law; 2008. https://b2n.ir/741297
Nikiforova B. Theological discourse in bioethics: General and confessional differences. Santalka: Filosofija, Komunikacija. 2006; 14(1):60-76. [DOI:10.3846/coactivity.2006.06]
Soleymani H. [The 613 commandments of the Torah (Persian)]. J Seven Heavens; 2003, 5(18):153-76. http://haftasman.urd.ac.ir/article_73803.html
Curtis M. Inconceivable: How barriers to infertility treatment for low-income women amount to reproductive oppression. Georgetown Poverty Law Policy. 2018; 25(2):341-2. https://www.law.georgetown.edu/poverty-journal/wp-content/uploads/sites/25/2018/05/25-2-Inconceivable.pdf
Shah DK, Goldman E, Fisseha S. Medical, ethical and legal consideration in assisted fertililty preservation. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011; 115(1):5-11. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.05.011] [PMID]
Department of Health and Social Care. Review of the human fertilisation and embryology act. London: UK Minister of State for Public Health; 2006. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-the-human-fertilisation-and-embryology-act
Präg P, Mills MC. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe: Usage and regulation in the context of cross-border reproductive care. Fam Soc. 2015; 43:1-24. http://www.familiesandsocieties.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/WP43PragMills2015.pdf
Australian Government, National Health and Medical Research Council. Ethical guidelines on the use of assisted reproductive technology in clinical practice and research. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC); 2017. https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/ethical-guidelines-use-assisted-reproductive-technology#
Peterson MM. Assisted reproductive technologies and equality of access issue. J Med Ethics. 2005; 31(5):280-5. [DOI:10.1136/jme.2003.007542] [PMID] [PMCID]
Victorian Repealed Acts. Infertility Treatment Act 1995. [Internet]. 2007 [Updated 2007 Jul 1]. Available from: http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/vic/repealed_act/ita1995264/
Ghadiri M. [The right to family life from a human rights perspective (Persian)]. [PhD dissertation]. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University; 2014.
Green J. Artificial insemination in Isreal- A legal view. Fertil Infertil Abort. 1991; 2(1):21-8. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/.jsource/judaism/insemination.pdf
Ghadiri M. The restrictions for ARTs applicants in the light of Human rights. Princ Bioethics Health Law J (BHL). 2017; 1(2):33-42. [DOI:10.22037/bhl.v1i2.18126]
Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee. Fertility society of Australia 2010 [Internet]. 2010 [Updated 2010 Oct]. Available from: https://www.fertilitysociety.com.au/wp-content/uploads/201011201-final-rtac-scheme.pdf
Aramesh K. [Studying of ethic principles in Gamete and Embryo Donation (Persian)]. Payesh J. 2007; 6(4):399-406. magiran.com/p574494
- Abstract Viewed: 88 times
- pdf Downloaded: 77 times