The human rights, bioethics and the human embryo.

Published: February 28, 2003
Abstract Views: 378
PDF (Italiano): 1
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 article deals with the close link between the reflection on the human rights and bioethics, documented by numerous juridical documents. This link sinks his roots in half last century and it is so rich that constitutes one of the characteristics of the modernity.

The expansive strength of the two reflections finds a result and a common perspective in the biolaw that is rising not only as a field of national laws based on practical, didactic or systematic criterions, but also as global reflection on the human rights whose core is constituted by meditation on human dignity, its content, its reasons. In fact, biolaw shows a speculative effort that knows how to gather a more authentic sense of the law and the human rights. This supplement of reflection is set in the perspective of the human existence threatened in many ways: the surgical and chemical abortion, the in vitro fertilisation, the use of the embryo for research.

After an analysis of the main juridical texts that deal, more or less directly, with different results, of the human embryo, the contribution underlines the reasons that sustain the human embryo as a subject. Such juridical reasons are the following: the human dignity and the linked principle of equality by the light of the Constitutions and the Declarations of rights; the juridical concept of person; the juridical consequence of the doubt.

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

How to Cite

Casini, M. (2003). The human rights, bioethics and the human embryo. Medicina E Morale, 52(1), 67–110. https://doi.org/10.4081/mem.2003.674