Circumvention tourism.

IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Cornell Law Review Pub Date : 2012-09-01
Glenn Cohen
{"title":"Circumvention tourism.","authors":"Glenn Cohen","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Under what circumstances should a citizen be able to avoid the penalties set by the citizen's home country's criminal law by going abroad to engage in the same activity where it is not criminally prohibited? Should we view the ability to engage in prohibited activities by traveling outside of the nation state as a way of accommodating cultural or political differences within our polity? These are general questions regarding the power and theory of extraterritorial application of domestic criminal law. In this Article, I examine the issues through a close exploration of one setting that urgently presents them: medical tourism. Medical tourism is a term used to describe the travel of patients who are citizens and residents of one country, the \"home country,\" to another country, the \"destination country,\" for medical treatment. This Article is the first to comprehensively examine a subcategory of medical tourism that I call \"circumvention tourism,\" which involves patients who travel abroad for services that are legal in the patient's destination country but illegal in the patient's home country--that is, travel to circumvent domestic prohibitions on accessing certain medical services. The four examples of this phenomenon that I dwell on are circumvention medical tourism for female genital cutting (FGC), abortion, reproductive technology usage, and assisted suicide. I will briefly discuss the \"can\" question: assuming that a domestic prohibition on access to one of these services is lawful, as a matter of international law, is the home country forbidden, permitted, or mandated to extend its existing criminal prohibition extraterritorially to home country citizens who travel abroad to circumvent the home country's prohibition? Most of the Article, though, is devoted to the \"ought\" question: assuming that the domestic prohibition is viewed as normatively well-grounded, under what circumstances should the home country extend its existing criminal prohibition extraterritorially to its citizens who travel abroad to circumvent the prohibition? I show that, contrary to much of current practice, in most instances, home countries should seek to extend extraterritorially their criminal prohibitions on FGC, abortion, assisted suicide, and, to a lesser extent, reproductive technology use to their citizens who travel abroad to circumvent the prohibition. I also discuss the ways in which my analysis of these prohibitions can serve as scaffolding for a more general theory of circumvention tourism.</p>","PeriodicalId":51518,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Law Review","volume":"97 6","pages":"1309-98"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2012-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cornell Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"","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

Abstract

Under what circumstances should a citizen be able to avoid the penalties set by the citizen's home country's criminal law by going abroad to engage in the same activity where it is not criminally prohibited? Should we view the ability to engage in prohibited activities by traveling outside of the nation state as a way of accommodating cultural or political differences within our polity? These are general questions regarding the power and theory of extraterritorial application of domestic criminal law. In this Article, I examine the issues through a close exploration of one setting that urgently presents them: medical tourism. Medical tourism is a term used to describe the travel of patients who are citizens and residents of one country, the "home country," to another country, the "destination country," for medical treatment. This Article is the first to comprehensively examine a subcategory of medical tourism that I call "circumvention tourism," which involves patients who travel abroad for services that are legal in the patient's destination country but illegal in the patient's home country--that is, travel to circumvent domestic prohibitions on accessing certain medical services. The four examples of this phenomenon that I dwell on are circumvention medical tourism for female genital cutting (FGC), abortion, reproductive technology usage, and assisted suicide. I will briefly discuss the "can" question: assuming that a domestic prohibition on access to one of these services is lawful, as a matter of international law, is the home country forbidden, permitted, or mandated to extend its existing criminal prohibition extraterritorially to home country citizens who travel abroad to circumvent the home country's prohibition? Most of the Article, though, is devoted to the "ought" question: assuming that the domestic prohibition is viewed as normatively well-grounded, under what circumstances should the home country extend its existing criminal prohibition extraterritorially to its citizens who travel abroad to circumvent the prohibition? I show that, contrary to much of current practice, in most instances, home countries should seek to extend extraterritorially their criminal prohibitions on FGC, abortion, assisted suicide, and, to a lesser extent, reproductive technology use to their citizens who travel abroad to circumvent the prohibition. I also discuss the ways in which my analysis of these prohibitions can serve as scaffolding for a more general theory of circumvention tourism.

规避旅游。
在什么情况下,公民出国从事不受刑事禁止的同一活动,可以避免其本国刑法所规定的处罚?我们是否应该把通过出国旅行来从事被禁止的活动的能力视为在我们的政体中容纳文化或政治差异的一种方式?这些都是关于国内刑法治外法权适用的权力和理论的一般性问题。在这篇文章中,我通过一个紧迫地呈现它们的设置仔细探索问题:医疗旅游。医疗旅游是一个术语,用来描述一个国家(“母国”)的公民和居民到另一个国家(“目的地国”)进行医疗的旅行。本文是第一个全面研究医疗旅游的子类别的文章,我称之为“规避旅游”,这涉及到在患者目的地国家合法但在患者本国非法的出国旅游服务的患者-即,为规避国内禁止获得某些医疗服务的旅行。我详述的这一现象的四个例子是女性生殖器切割(FGC),堕胎,生殖技术的使用和协助自杀的规避医疗旅游。我将简要讨论“能否”的问题:假设国内禁止使用其中一种服务是合法的,作为国际法问题,母国是否禁止、允许或授权将其现有的刑事禁令扩大到域外,适用于为规避母国禁令而出国旅行的母国公民?然而,该条的大部分内容都致力于“应该”的问题:假设国内禁令被视为在规范上是有充分根据的,那么在什么情况下,母国应该将其现有的刑事禁令扩展到境外以规避禁令的本国公民?我表明,与目前的许多做法相反,在大多数情况下,母国应该寻求将其对女性生殖器切割、堕胎、协助自杀以及(在较小程度上)生殖技术使用的刑事禁令扩展到境外,以避免其公民出国旅行。我还讨论了我对这些禁令的分析可以作为更一般的规避旅游理论的框架的方式。
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
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Founded in 1915, the Cornell Law Review is a student-run and student-edited journal that strives to publish novel scholarship that will have an immediate and lasting impact on the legal community. The Cornell Law Review publishes six issues annually consisting of articles, essays, book reviews, and student notes.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信