The recent debate on the theoretical possibility of cloning human beings is urging society to develope a global legal barrier in order to prohibit the use of this technique on humans. Some national legislation, e.g. Germany, already bans the cloning of human beings. The European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine contains three articles which together form the cornerstones for a prohibition of cloning: Article 1 guarantees the identity of human beings, Article 18.2 explicitly prohibits the creation of human embryos for research purposes and Article 13 contains a prohibition on the modification of the genome of any decendants. The prohibition of cloning human beings in the Protocol on Embryo Protection foreseen by the Council of Europe seems a necessary consequence. Furthermore, the forthcoming UNESCO Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights should contain such an explicit prohibition.
Leuven Abstract Th e EuropeanConventiononHumanRightsandBiomedicine of the Council of Europe provides in article 6 for special protection of persons who are not able to give free and informed consent to an inter- vention in the health ﬁ eld, e.g. minors. According to the second paragraph of this
interpretation in relation to individuals with psychosocial disabilities. The article then turns to examining the protection provided under the echr and the Council of EuropeConventiononHumanRightsandBiomedicine, before reaching the conclusion that only ‘weak’ protection has been afforded to people with
Within the common law world, the use of the term informed consent implies the American doctrine. Informed consent as a doctrine is not part of the law in the United Kingdom. However, it is possible to predict a way forward in disclosure cases yet to be heard in the courts of the United Kingdom. These predictions are based on current developments in the common law in the United Kingdom as well as those in Canada and Australia, on the European convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine and on trends within the medical profession itself in the light of the Bolam test.
— economically and politically, making harmonised legislation for human research subject protection indispensible. Th e EuropeanConventiononHumanRightsandBiomedicine is the ﬁ rst binding contract under international law to protect human rights in the ﬁ eld of biomedical research. Almost 10 years after its
Until 1998 research on in vitro human embryos concentrated on the issues related to assisted reproduction. The situation changed dramatically when the first scientific report on the laboratory culture of human embryonic stem cells was published. This scientific breakthrough with new therapeutic promises put human embryo into a new, more vulnerable position. Combined with creation of embryos via somatic cell nuclear transfer, it inveigles into mass production of embryos, first for scientific purposes, but later perhaps for the healing of people.This article examines the efficacy of the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine in protecting embryos in this new era of embryo research. The interpretative latitude of Article 18 of the Convention is demonstrated, and legislation in three Nordic countries with highly variable approach to embryo research regulation is analysed. I examine how this divergence is possible in the light of the Convention text. In the end, potential reasons for variation in regulation in the otherwise similar Nordic countries are discussed, as well as under what conditions harmonisation of regulation on embryo research, a highly value-charged matter, could be possible at the European level.
issue of post-mortem use of bioresources. The EuropeanConventiononHumanRightsandBiomedicine 1997 did not include the issue of a deceased donor in its consideration of protection of persons not able to consent. 20 Similarly, the provisions of the Blood and Tissue Directives, 21 as well as the
first convention dedicated to providing minimum standards in biomedical law entered into force: the Council of EuropeConventiononHumanRightsandBiomedicine. 26 The Biomedicine Convention’s origin lies in a desire on the part of the Council of Europe to protect human dignity in light of
living document, its point of view is certainly important. On this European level, the EuropeanConventiononHumanRightsandBiomedicine will also be analysed, in which articles 6 and 9 can be regarded as very important European provisions when it comes to regulating advance directives. Together with