Legal issues in posthumous conception using gametes removed from a comatose male: The case of Ex Parte SN

IF 0.5 Q4 MEDICAL ETHICS
B. Shozi
{"title":"Legal issues in posthumous conception using gametes removed from a comatose male: The case of Ex Parte SN","authors":"B. Shozi","doi":"10.7196/SAJBL.2021.V14I1.00728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In only the second case dealing with posthumous conception in South Africa – Ex Parte SN – a woman approached the High Court seeking an urgent order allowing her to have sperm removed from the body of her comatose husband, so that she could use it for reproductive purposes after his death. This raised two separate legal issues: ( i ) whether gamete removal may occur where the person from whom the gametes are being removed is unable to consent; and ( ii ) whether gametes removed in this way could be used for posthumous conception. The court held that the woman was allowed to have the gametes removed, but did not engage with whether she could use them for posthumous reproduction. The court did not provide reasons, as this case was determined on an urgent basis. This article provides a background to this case, and analyses the main arguments surrounding each of these legal issues. It concludes that the law allows that a person who has the authority to give consent to health services on the comatose patient’s behalf may also give consent to gamete removal. However, whether these gametes may then be used for posthumous conception should be determined by a court, by balancing the various rights and legal interests at play. Three criteria that should guide a court’s determination in cases of posthumous conception are provided.","PeriodicalId":43498,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law","volume":"14 1","pages":"28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7196/SAJBL.2021.V14I1.00728","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In only the second case dealing with posthumous conception in South Africa – Ex Parte SN – a woman approached the High Court seeking an urgent order allowing her to have sperm removed from the body of her comatose husband, so that she could use it for reproductive purposes after his death. This raised two separate legal issues: ( i ) whether gamete removal may occur where the person from whom the gametes are being removed is unable to consent; and ( ii ) whether gametes removed in this way could be used for posthumous conception. The court held that the woman was allowed to have the gametes removed, but did not engage with whether she could use them for posthumous reproduction. The court did not provide reasons, as this case was determined on an urgent basis. This article provides a background to this case, and analyses the main arguments surrounding each of these legal issues. It concludes that the law allows that a person who has the authority to give consent to health services on the comatose patient’s behalf may also give consent to gamete removal. However, whether these gametes may then be used for posthumous conception should be determined by a court, by balancing the various rights and legal interests at play. Three criteria that should guide a court’s determination in cases of posthumous conception are provided.
从昏迷男性身上取下配子的死后受孕的法律问题:单方个案
在南非处理死后受孕的第二个案件中,一名妇女向高等法院寻求紧急命令,允许她从昏迷丈夫身上取出精子,以便在丈夫去世后用于生殖目的。这引发了两个独立的法律问题:(i)如果被摘除配子的人无法同意,是否会进行配子摘除;以及(ii)以这种方式去除的配子是否可以用于死后受孕。法院认为,这名妇女被允许摘除配子,但没有考虑是否可以在死后使用配子进行繁殖。法院没有提供理由,因为本案是在紧急情况下裁定的。本文提供了本案的背景,并分析了围绕每一个法律问题的主要论点。它的结论是,法律允许有权代表昏迷患者同意医疗服务的人也可以同意摘除配子。然而,这些配子是否可以用于死后受孕,应由法院通过平衡各种权利和法律利益来决定。在死后受孕的案件中,有三个标准应该指导法院的裁决。
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
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
18
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
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