Available in Russian
Author: Maria Posadkova
DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2022-6-72-94
Keywords: human rights; somatic rights; reproductive rights; evolution of law; dignity of the individual; the right to respect for private and family life; freedom of discretion of the state; medical law, the right to health protection and medical care; balance of interests; the European Court of Human Rights
The evolution of human rights is inextricably linked to the development of public institutions formed under the influence of changing reality. Thanks to research in the field of reproduction and genetics, significant advances have been made in the field of human reproductive and genetic health, namely, the introduction of diagnostic studies of the fetus (embryo) both in the womb and in vitro by in vitro fertilization and surrogacy. The study focuses on an analysis of constitutional and legal issues of the use of preimplantation and prenatal diagnoses of the embryo (fetus) using assisted reproductive technologies for the purpose of prevention of the birth of children with genetic (inherited) mutations, and, in cases where this is not possible, for early preparation and adaptation by these children’s biological parents to a severe life-threatening diagnosis for their child, both in furtherance of the child’s well-being and for assistance to the parents. The article proposes an expansion of the system of constitutional human rights by recognizing an independent subjective reproductive right in the use of auxiliary and genetic engineering technologies. The author hypothesizes about the complex nature of this right, taking into account its direct connection with “traditional” constitutional rights, namely, the dignity of the individual; the right to respect for private life; the right to health protection and medical care; and the right to protection of childhood, motherhood and fatherhood. In addition, the main, distinctive characteristics of this reproductive right are analyzed, including consideration of the reproductive and genetic well-being of the mother and the unborn child as special objects of protection, and consideration the role of public authorities in organizing access to high-tech means of reproductive genetics as a prerequisite for the existence of the right in each particular state. The European Court of Human Rights’ procedure for implementing this independent right in its practice is also considered. The author categorizes the main judicial decisions on this issue arising in disputes about access to reproductive law using assisted and reproductive technologies and in disputes over compensation for damage for providing false information about the genetic characteristics of the fetus (embryo).
About the author: Maria Posadkova – Ph.D. Student, Researcher, Scientific and Educational Laboratory of International Justice, Higher School of Economics; Lecturer, Department of Medical Law, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia.
Citation: Posadkova M. (2022) Budushchee uzhe zdes’: o konstitutsionnoy prirode reproduktivnogo prava na rozhdenie rebyonka s ispol’zovaniem vspomogatel’nykh tekhnologiy [The future has arrived: the constitutional nature of a right of access to reproductive and genetic technologies]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 72–94. (In Russian).
References
Babaev A.A., Ezhova G.P., Novikova N.A., Novikov V.V. (2007) Gennaya terapiya: korrektsiya geneticheskoy informatsii [Gene therapy: correction of genetic information]. Available at: http://www.unn.ru/pages/e-library/aids/2007/33.pdf (accessed: 27.10.2022). (In Russian).
Bayefsky M.J. (2016) Comparative Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis Policy in Europe and the USA and Its Implications for Reproductive Tourism. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online, vol. 3, pp. 41–47.
Bogdanova N.А. (1998) Kategoriya statusa v konstitutsionnom prave [Category of status in constitutional law]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 11: Pravo, no. 3, pp. 3–20. (In Russian).
Bondar’ N.S. (1998) Prava cheloveka i mestnoe samoupravlenie v RF [Human rights and local self-government in the Russian Federation], Moscow: Norma: INFRA-M. (In Russian).
Chokoshvili D., Vears D., Borry P. (2018) Expanded Carrier Screening for Monogenic Disorders: Where Are We Now? Prenatal Diagnosis, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 59–66.
Dimitrova I. (2014) Detorozhdenie i otvetstvennost’: sluchay perinatal’noy diagnostiki v Bolgarii [Procreating responsibly: the case of prenatal diagnosis in Bulgaria]. Zhurnal issledovaniy sotsial’noy politiki, no. 3, pp. 455–468. (In Russian).
El-Helou S.M., Biegner A.-K., Bode S., Ehl S.R., Heeg M., Maccari M.E. et al. (2019) The German National Registry of Primary Immunodeficiencies (2012–2017). Frontiers in Immunology. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2019.01272/full (accessed: 27.10.2022).
Enríquez P. (2017) Genome Editing and the Jurisprudence of Scientific Empiricism. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 603–695.
Khayat S.Sh., Kurilo L.F., Chernykh V.B. (2019) Vspomogatel’nye reproduktivnye tekhnologii i pravovaya problema vybora pola ploda [Assisted reproductive technologies and legal aspects of sex selection]. Andrologiya i genital’naya khirurgiya, no. 2, pp. 64–68. (In Russian).
Khramova T. (2019) Pravo na uvazhenie gendernoy identichnosti: novye standarty avtonomii lichnosti [A right to respect for gender identity: new standards for personal autonomy]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoy obozrenie, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 54–68. (In Russian).
Korsunskiy I.A. (2019) Rannyaya diagnostika immunodefitsitnykh sostoyaniy u detey: klinicheskie i laboratornye aspekty: Dis. … d-ra med. nauk [Early diagnosis of immunodeficiency conditions in children: clinical and laboratory aspects: Dr. of med. sci. dis.], Moscow. (In Russian).
Kruss V.I. (2000) Lichnostnye (“somaticheskie”) prava cheloveka v konstitutsionnom i filosofsko-pravovom izmerenii: k postanovke problemy [Personal (“somatic”) human rights in the constitutional and philosophical-legal dimension: towards the formulation of the problem]. Gosudarstvo i pravo, no. 10, pp. 43–50. (In Russian).
Kuz’menko N.B., Mukhina A.A. et al. (2021) Khromosomnye aberratsii kak prichina kompleksnogo fenotipa u detey s pervichnymi immunodefitsitami [Chromosomal aberrations as the cause of a complex phenotype in children with primary immunodeficiencies]. Voprosy gematologii/onkologii i immunopatologii v pediatrii, no. 4, pp. 62–67. (In Russian).
Kuz’menko N.B., Mukhina A.A. et al. (2021) Analiz semeynykh sluchaev pervichnykh immunodefitsitov v kontekste geneticheskogo konsul’tirovaniya [Analysis of familial cases of primary immunodeficiency in the context of genetic counseling]. Voprosy gematologii/onkologii i immunopatologii v pediatrii, no. 4, pp. 125–133. (In Russian).
Luchaire F. (1993) Konstitutsionnaya zashchita prav i svobod lichnosti [Constitutional protection of individual rights and freedoms], S.V.Bobotov, D.I.Vasil’ev (transl.), Moscow: “Progress” – “Univers”. (In Russian).
Maslennikova S.V. (2001) Narodnoe predstavitel’stvo i prava grazhdan v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: Dis. … kand. yurid. nauk [People’s representation and citizens’ rights in the Russian Federation: Cand. in law sci. dis.], Moscow. (In Russian).
Matthews D. (2022) Access to CRISPR Genome Editing Technologies: Patents, Human Rights and the Public Interest. In: Correa C.M., Hilty R.M. (eds.) Access to Medicines and Vaccines, Springer: Cham, pp. 105–133.
Ochs H.D., Smith C.I.E., Puck J.M. (eds.) (2007) Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases: A Molecular and Genetic Approach, 2nd ed., New York: Oxford University Press.
Polcz S., Lewis A. (2016) CRISPR-Cas9 and the Non-Germline Non-Controversy. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 413–425.
Präg P., Mills M.C. (2017) Assisted Reproductive Technology in Europe: Usage and Regulation in the Context of Cross-Border Reproductive Care. In: Kreyenfeld M., Konietzka D. (eds.) Childlessness in Europe: Contexts, Causes, and Consequences, Cham: Springer, pp. 289–309.
De Salvia M. (2012) Razmyshleniya ob aksiologicheskom podkhode v praktike Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka [Thoughts on an axiological approach in the European Court of Human Rights’s practice]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 70–79. (In Russian).
Salikhov D.R.(2017) Konstitutsionno-pravovoe regulirovanie protestnykh otnosheniy v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: Dis. … kand. yurid. nauk [Constitutional and legal regulation of protest relations in the Russian Federation: Cand. in law sci. dis.], Moscow. (In Russian).
Sheldon S., Wilkinson S. (2004) Should Selecting Saviour Siblings Be Banned? Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 533–537.
Spriggs M., Savulescu J. (2002) Saviour Siblings. Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 289.
Starostina I.A. (1998) Vsenarodnye obsuzhdeniya: pravovye vozmozhnosti i praktika [National discussions: legal possibilities and practice]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 11: Pravo, no. 1, pp. 40–55. (In Russian).
Troitskaya A. (2012) Pravo na protest: soderzhanie i effektivnost’ realizatsii [Right to protest: substance and efficiency of its realization]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 34–42. (In Russian).
Wu J., Zhong W., Yin Y., Zhang H. (2019) Primary Immunodeficiency Disease: A Retrospective Study of 112 Chinese Children in a Single Tertiary Care Center. BMC Pediatrics. Available at: https://bmcpediatr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12887-019-1729-7 (accessed: 27.10.2022).