跨境代孕与《欧洲人权公约》:斯特拉斯堡法院在 "既成事实"、"公共秩序 "和儿童最大利益之间徘徊

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights Pub Date : 2024-04-18 DOI:10.1177/09240519241246131
Koen Lemmens
{"title":"跨境代孕与《欧洲人权公约》:斯特拉斯堡法院在 \"既成事实\"、\"公共秩序 \"和儿童最大利益之间徘徊","authors":"Koen Lemmens","doi":"10.1177/09240519241246131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Surrogacy is a form of family creation that raises many medical, ethical, and legal questions. This article examines how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) deals with the issue of cross-border surrogacy and its legal consequences in its recent case law. It will demonstrated that the Strasbourg Court has developed a nuanced case law that leaves it in the first place to the national authorities to deal with the complex issue of surrogacy, whereby it is nevertheless clear that further to the Strasbourg case law even if legislators rule out the possibility of surrogacy on their territory, they will have to find solutions to “‘regularise”’ the de facto situation of the child, taking into account its best interests.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cross-border surrogacy and the European Convention on Human Rights: The Strasbourg Court caught between “fait accompli”, “ordre public”, and the best interest of the child\",\"authors\":\"Koen Lemmens\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09240519241246131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Surrogacy is a form of family creation that raises many medical, ethical, and legal questions. This article examines how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) deals with the issue of cross-border surrogacy and its legal consequences in its recent case law. It will demonstrated that the Strasbourg Court has developed a nuanced case law that leaves it in the first place to the national authorities to deal with the complex issue of surrogacy, whereby it is nevertheless clear that further to the Strasbourg case law even if legislators rule out the possibility of surrogacy on their territory, they will have to find solutions to “‘regularise”’ the de facto situation of the child, taking into account its best interests.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519241246131\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519241246131","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

代孕是一种创造家庭的形式,它引发了许多医学、伦理和法律问题。本文探讨了欧洲人权法院(ECtHR)在最近的判例法中是如何处理跨境代孕问题及其法律后果的。它将表明,斯特拉斯堡法院已经制定了一个细致入微的判例法,首先由国家当局来处理代孕这一复杂问题,不过,根据斯特拉斯堡判例法,即使立法者排除了在其领土上代孕的可能性,他们也必须在考虑到儿童最大利益的情况下找到解决方案,使儿童的实际情况 "合法化"。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cross-border surrogacy and the European Convention on Human Rights: The Strasbourg Court caught between “fait accompli”, “ordre public”, and the best interest of the child
Surrogacy is a form of family creation that raises many medical, ethical, and legal questions. This article examines how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) deals with the issue of cross-border surrogacy and its legal consequences in its recent case law. It will demonstrated that the Strasbourg Court has developed a nuanced case law that leaves it in the first place to the national authorities to deal with the complex issue of surrogacy, whereby it is nevertheless clear that further to the Strasbourg case law even if legislators rule out the possibility of surrogacy on their territory, they will have to find solutions to “‘regularise”’ the de facto situation of the child, taking into account its best interests.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Human rights are universal and indivisible. Their fundamental importance makes it essential for anyone with an interest in the field to keep abreast of the latest developments. The Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights (NQHR) is an academic peer-reviewed journal that publishes the latest evolutions in the promotion and protection of human rights from around the world. The NQHR includes multidisciplinary articles addressing human rights issues from an international perspective. In addition, the Quarterly also publishes recent speeches and lectures delivered on the topic of human rights, as well as a section on new books and articles in the field of human rights. The Quarterly employs a double-blind peer review process, and the international editorial board of leading human rights scholars guarantees the maintenance of the highest standard of articles published.
期刊最新文献
Recent publications September 2024 Religious dress in the healthcare setting: Unpacking legal arguments and balancing individual rights Sounding the alarm for digital agriculture: Examining risks to the human rights to science and food Cross-border surrogacy and the European Convention on Human Rights: The Strasbourg Court caught between “fait accompli”, “ordre public”, and the best interest of the child Berlin techno goes intangible cultural heritage: Modern music, the cultural appropriation debate, and the international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1