The rights of donor inseminated children to know their genetic origins in Australia.

Australian journal of family law Pub Date : 2005-12-01
Edwina Anne Schneller
{"title":"The rights of donor inseminated children to know their genetic origins in Australia.","authors":"Edwina Anne Schneller","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Twenty years after it was recognised that adopted children have rights to understand their origins, the dawn has finally broken with respect to children conceived as a result of the Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART), specifically donor insemination (DI). Recipients and practitioners of conception technologies focus their energies and ethical deliberation on the achievement of pregnancy and the successful birth of the child. Law, in contrast, must focus beyond birth to enshrine respect for the rights of the child, who is 'not legally capable of defending [his or her] own future interests.' This article undertakes an assessment of what is in the best interests of a child using empirical studies to ground a position that should be adopted by law in Australia. This article also critically evaluates the current legal position of the various States and Territories with regards to a DI conceived child's rights to know of their form of conception; access to identifying information of their donor; at what age they may access information; the position of DI children born before existing legislation; record-keeping; and finally whether international law grants such children rights. Australian children must enjoy the right in theory and practice to know they were donor conceived and the identity of their donor. It is disappointing that New South Wales, as the most recent State to propose legislation on ART, has not utilised international empirical research on the best interests of DI children or even followed the Infertility Treatment Act 1995 (Vic) which seems to be far more progressive in recognising how best to protect the rights of DI children. The current legal position is chaotic. States and Territories should confer power on the Federal Government to legislate uniform and explicit regulation of ART for the benefit of DI children.</p>","PeriodicalId":80605,"journal":{"name":"Australian journal of family law","volume":"19 3","pages":"222-44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian journal of family law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Twenty years after it was recognised that adopted children have rights to understand their origins, the dawn has finally broken with respect to children conceived as a result of the Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART), specifically donor insemination (DI). Recipients and practitioners of conception technologies focus their energies and ethical deliberation on the achievement of pregnancy and the successful birth of the child. Law, in contrast, must focus beyond birth to enshrine respect for the rights of the child, who is 'not legally capable of defending [his or her] own future interests.' This article undertakes an assessment of what is in the best interests of a child using empirical studies to ground a position that should be adopted by law in Australia. This article also critically evaluates the current legal position of the various States and Territories with regards to a DI conceived child's rights to know of their form of conception; access to identifying information of their donor; at what age they may access information; the position of DI children born before existing legislation; record-keeping; and finally whether international law grants such children rights. Australian children must enjoy the right in theory and practice to know they were donor conceived and the identity of their donor. It is disappointing that New South Wales, as the most recent State to propose legislation on ART, has not utilised international empirical research on the best interests of DI children or even followed the Infertility Treatment Act 1995 (Vic) which seems to be far more progressive in recognising how best to protect the rights of DI children. The current legal position is chaotic. States and Territories should confer power on the Federal Government to legislate uniform and explicit regulation of ART for the benefit of DI children.

在澳大利亚,捐赠者授精儿童了解其基因起源的权利。
20年前,人们承认被收养的孩子有权了解自己的身世。如今,借助辅助生殖技术(ART),特别是人工授精技术(DI)孕育的孩子终于迎来了曙光。受孕技术的接受者和实践者将他们的精力和伦理思考集中在实现怀孕和孩子的成功出生上。相比之下,法律的重点必须超越出生,体现对儿童权利的尊重,因为儿童在法律上没有能力捍卫自己未来的利益。本文利用实证研究对儿童的最大利益进行了评估,以确定澳大利亚应通过法律的立场。本文还批判性地评估了各州和地区目前在人工受孕儿童了解其受孕形式的权利方面的法律立场;获得其捐赠者的身份信息;他们在什么年龄可以获取信息;在现行立法之前出生的残疾儿童的处境;记录;最后,国际法是否赋予这些儿童权利。澳大利亚儿童在理论上和实践上都必须享有知道自己是捐赠者受孕的权利和捐赠者身份的权利。令人失望的是,作为最近提出抗逆转录病毒治疗立法的州,新南威尔士州没有利用国际上对残障儿童最大利益的实证研究,甚至没有遵循1995年《不孕症治疗法》(Vic),后者在认识到如何最好地保护残障儿童的权利方面似乎进步得多。目前的法律地位是混乱的。各州和地区应赋予联邦政府权力,为残残儿童的利益制定统一和明确的抗逆转录病毒治疗法规。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信