David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (2):181 – 194 (2000)
In the course of its preparation, the 1997 convention on human rights and biomedicine adopted by the Council of Europe instigated a widespread debate. This article examines one of the core issues: the notion of the human being as depicted in the convention. It is argued that according to the convention, this being may exist in three different legal categories, namely 'human life', 'embryo', and 'personhood', each furnished with an inherent set of somewhat different rights, yet none of them clearly defined, thus leaving it to domestic law to regulate at what point a human being belongs to which category. While this approach is understandable from a political point of view, it creates a vicious circle, since law thereby has to define its own foundation and, in the case of the convention, to protect a being that it cannot define. It appears that this form of life is seen rather as a given entity, taking precedence over the interests of society and science, and its dignity and identity forming criteria for the subsequent systems of culture, simply because this life is human and nothing else. Thus, the convention approaches a natural law position.
|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
Martin Gunderson (2006). Human Rights, Dignity, and the Science of Genetic Engineering. Social Philosophy Today 22:43-57.
Council of Europe (1997). Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with Regard to the Application of Biology and Biomedicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 7 (3):277-290.
Maurizio Mori & Demetrio Neri (2001). Perils and Deficiencies of the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 26 (3):323 – 333.
Frederic Megret, The Disabilities Convention: Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities or Disability Rights?
Rick Lawson (2010). Pt. 1. Setting the Scene: Human Rights and Health Ethics. Dwelling on the Threshold: On the Interaction Between the European Convention on Human Rights and the Biomedicine Convention. [REVIEW] In André den Exter (ed.), Human Rights and Biomedicine. Maklu.
Corinna Delkeskamp-Hayes (2000). Respecting, Protecting, Persons, Humans, and Conceptual Muddles in the Bioethics Convention. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (2):147 – 180.
Gilbert Hottois (2000). A Philosophical and Critical Analysis of the European Convention of Bioethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (2):133 – 146.
F. William Dommel & Duane Alexander (1997). The Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine of the Council of Europe. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 7 (3):259-276.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #92,698 of 1,101,125 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #27,838 of 1,101,125 )
How can I increase my downloads?