Eva Brems
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- August 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780198795957
- eISBN:
- 9780191837135
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198795957.003.0005
- Subject:
- Law, Human Rights and Immigration, Public International Law
This chapter discusses the 2007 Grand Chamber judgment of Evans v. The United Kingdom, in which the European Court of Human Rights stated that the destruction of frozen embryos against the will of ...
More
This chapter discusses the 2007 Grand Chamber judgment of Evans v. The United Kingdom, in which the European Court of Human Rights stated that the destruction of frozen embryos against the will of the female contributor, who had invested her last egg cells in these embryos, did not violate the Convention. The chapter argues in favour of a different outcome. The alternative approach to Evans follows a method that stands on two legs. The first leg is a three-step model for addressing conflicts between human rights, that the author has developed in previous research. The second leg is an integrated perspective of international human rights law, that brings in insights from women’s rights and disability rights.Less
This chapter discusses the 2007 Grand Chamber judgment of Evans v. The United Kingdom, in which the European Court of Human Rights stated that the destruction of frozen embryos against the will of the female contributor, who had invested her last egg cells in these embryos, did not violate the Convention. The chapter argues in favour of a different outcome. The alternative approach to Evans follows a method that stands on two legs. The first leg is a three-step model for addressing conflicts between human rights, that the author has developed in previous research. The second leg is an integrated perspective of international human rights law, that brings in insights from women’s rights and disability rights.
Lorenzo Zucca
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- August 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780198795957
- eISBN:
- 9780191837135
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198795957.003.0006
- Subject:
- Law, Human Rights and Immigration, Public International Law
Genuine conflicts of rights imply a choice between two valuable goods and an inevitable sacrifice as a consequence. In Evans v. The United Kingdom the choice was between imposing fatherhood on one of ...
More
Genuine conflicts of rights imply a choice between two valuable goods and an inevitable sacrifice as a consequence. In Evans v. The United Kingdom the choice was between imposing fatherhood on one of the parties or denying biological motherhood to the other. The case was presented as a dilemma, and this chapter suggests a cautious approach to the resolution of dilemmas. In medical ethics, technological advancements largely determine the range of options open to individuals. Medical progress is so fast that a dead end one day can become an opportunity the next. This reshapes the choices individuals have and ultimately dispels the necessary choice between options that seemed to lead to a sacrifice of value. This chapter argues that given the state of incessant medical progress, it is fundamental that the law refrains from coercing either party to do something without their consent.Less
Genuine conflicts of rights imply a choice between two valuable goods and an inevitable sacrifice as a consequence. In Evans v. The United Kingdom the choice was between imposing fatherhood on one of the parties or denying biological motherhood to the other. The case was presented as a dilemma, and this chapter suggests a cautious approach to the resolution of dilemmas. In medical ethics, technological advancements largely determine the range of options open to individuals. Medical progress is so fast that a dead end one day can become an opportunity the next. This reshapes the choices individuals have and ultimately dispels the necessary choice between options that seemed to lead to a sacrifice of value. This chapter argues that given the state of incessant medical progress, it is fundamental that the law refrains from coercing either party to do something without their consent.
