| Extraterritoriality for cross-border reproductive care: should states act against citizens travelling abroad for illegal infertility treatment? | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 21955486 Owner: NLM Status: Publisher |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
Since the development of assisted reproduction technologies, there has been discussion on which people should have access to these technologies and which treatments and techniques are morally acceptable. However, national legislation can no longer determine what citizens do. Some countries react to their citizens going abroad to evade restrictions by implementing even more restrictive laws. Turkey has recently become the first state to ban reproductive travel in pursuit of donor gametes. Several states in Australia have enacted or are considering laws that prohibit international commercial surrogacy. This article investigates the consistency and morality of several state reactions to cross-border reproductive care (CBRC), including extraterritorial regulation. The only widespread existing extraterritorial regulation of private life concerns female genital cutting (FGC), sex with children and (largely in the past) abortion. This discussion develops an analogy with these cross-border crimes to evaluate the morality of similar legislation in cases of CBRC. The dissimilarity in these analogies shows that extraterritoriality is a radical position that is generally inappropriate in the case of CBRC. Subsequently, several potential state reactions to CBRC for law evasion are considered. It is concluded that legislation of CBRC should be modest, tolerant and nuanced. Since the dawn of assisted reproduction, there has been discussion as to which people should have access to these technologies and which treatments and techniques are morally acceptable. However, national legislation can no longer determine what citizens do. Some countries react to their citizens going abroad to evade restrictions by implementing even more restrictive laws. Turkey has recently become the first state to ban reproductive travel in pursuit of donor gametes. Several states in Australia have enacted or are considering laws that prohibit international commercial surrogacy. In this article, we investigate the consistency and morality of several state reactions to cross-border reproductive care (CBRC), including extraterritorial regulation. The only widespread existing extraterritorial regulation of private life concerns female genital cutting (FGC), sex with children and (largely in the past) abortion. We develop an analogy with these cross-border crimes to evaluate the morality of similar legislation in cases of CBRC. The dissimilarity in these analogies shows that extraterritoriality is a radical position that is generally inappropriate in the case of CBRC. Subsequently, we consider several potential state reactions to CBRC for law evasion. It is concluded that legislation of CBRC should be modest, tolerant and nuanced. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Wannes Van Hoof; Guido Pennings |
Related Documents
:
|
21896796 - Review and assessment of the american society of tropical medicine and hygiene travel a... 9033376 - A critical evaluation of free paper abstracts accepted for the 1996 racs annual scienti... 20584866 - Proceedings of vra. 6104296 - Fate of cardiology research originally published in abstract form. 22291406 - Scopolamine, cognition and dementia. 15569586 - Association of body mass index to meeting physical activity recommendations. |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE Date: 2011-7-27 |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Reproductive biomedicine online Volume: - ISSN: 1472-6491 ISO Abbreviation: - Publication Date: 2011 Jul |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2011-9-29 Completed Date: - Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 101122473 Medline TA: Reprod Biomed Online Country: - |
Other Details:
|
Languages: ENG Pagination: - Citation Subset: - |
Copyright Information:
|
Copyright © 2011 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. |
Affiliation:
|
Bioethics Institute Ghent, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Survival impact of capsule rupture in stage I clear cell carcinoma of the ovary in comparison with o...
Next Document: Implementing a good practice guide for CBRC: perspectives from the ESHRE Cross-Border Reproductive C...