Interstate intercourse: How modern assisted reproductive technologies challenge the traditional realm of conflicts of law
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
New technologies have always posed challenges to established legal norms. Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) in particular pose legal and ethical challenges to the law, and create never before seen legal problems. Although the ABA House of Representatives recently approved the Model Act Governing Assisted Reproductive Technology, differences in laws and rules will continue to exist. The legal issued involved are wide-ranging, including: liability issues arising from the failure of ART technology, parentage issues, disposition of embryos, and many others. As ART becomes more widely used, it is also used more in an interstate and international context. Thus, when a dispute arises, it often involves litigants from different states, and therefore creates the potential of conflicting laws.This article discusses how many ART procedures can be done, and often times are done, across state lines, and between individuals from different states. This creates challenging legal situations for the courts, both in deciding what the law is, or should be, and second in deciding which state's law to apply. Recent scholarship has addressed the first question but this article focuses on the second. It proposes solutions to complicated - and current - ART choice of law conundrums.The first section describes Assisted Reproductive Technologies, so that the reader understands the background to the potential problems that may arise. The second section discusses possible problems with ART and lawsuits that have arisen, some, within the last year. The third section describes current choice of law options, and how these might be applied, and have been applied, to ART lawsuits. The last section proposes solutions for resolving multi-state ART lawsuits, including the best choice of law approach for this area of the law, and how parties can protect themselves through more proactive choices of law in contract formation.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Thérèse Murphy (ed.) (2009). New Technologies and Human Rights. Oxford University Press.
Kristine S. Knaplund, Legal Issues of Maternity and Inheritance for the Biotech Child of the 21st Century.
Jennifer Parks (2009). Rethinking Radical Politics in the Context of Assisted Reproductive Technology. Bioethics 23 (1):20-27.
Serap Sahinoglu & Nuket Buken (2010). Gender, Infertility, Motherhood, and Assisted Reproductive Technology in Turkey. Human Reproduction and Genetic Ethics 16 (2):218-232.
Michele Goodwin, Assisted Reproductive Technology & the Double-Bind: The Illusory Choice of Motherhood.
Ruth Deech & Anna Smajdor (2007). From Ivf to Immortality: Controversy in the Era of Reproductive Technology. OUP Oxford.
Thérèse Murphy (2009). The Texture of Reproductive Choice : Law, Ethnography, and Reproductive Technologies. In New Technologies and Human Rights. Oxford University Press
Susan L. Crockin (2010). Legal Conceptions: The Evolving Law and Policy of Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?