Sensitivity to pain: from animal ethics to human fetal ethics. A challenge for a legal status of the fetus in France

Published: April 14, 2022
Abstract Views: 1813
PDF (Français (France)): 9
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Authors

The ecological and environmental crisis prompts activists to raise their voices to pay more attention to animal welfare. In order for their voice to be heard, they try to go through the law to legislate their claims; they achieve this by presenting as the main argument the question of sensitivity to pain in animals. A recent study, dating November 2021, concerning the «suffering of crustaceans» recognized by the British government and the introduction of a proposed legislation on animal welfare - a project backed by science - to be extended to these animals are a good witness. In France, the animal has a special status in the Civil Code, since 2015, as a «being endowed with sensitivity», a status which gives it legal protection. At the same time, the laws supporting Voluntary Pregnancy Interruption are evolving at a rapid pace in France, where we come up against the bioethical dilemma concerning respect for human life and the legal status of the fetus. This article aims to answer the following problem: does the human fetus have legal protection similar to that of animals based on the criterion of «sensitivity to pain»? This is a comparative approach based on the legislative texts of French law.

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

How to Cite

Badr, M. (2022). Sensitivity to pain: from animal ethics to human fetal ethics. A challenge for a legal status of the fetus in France. Medicina E Morale, 71(1), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.4081/mem.2022.1201