What makes a parent in surrogacy cases? Reflections on the Fjölnisdóttir et al. v. Iceland decision of the European Court of Human Rights

Q2 Social Sciences
Julian W. März
{"title":"What makes a parent in surrogacy cases? Reflections on the Fjölnisdóttir et al. v. Iceland decision of the European Court of Human Rights","authors":"Julian W. März","doi":"10.1177/09685332211043499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present commentary analyses and discusses the Fjölnisdóttir et al. v. Iceland decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) of 18 May 2021. The case concerned an Icelandic couple who had been recognised as the legal parents of a child born by a surrogate mother in California. In contrast to most other surrogacy cases decided by the ECtHR, however, the child had no biological link to either of the intended parents. The ECtHR thus found that a ruling of the Supreme Court of Iceland which had rejected the recognition of the legal parenthood of the intended parents under Icelandic law had not violated Art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, despite the fact that joint adoption by the intended parents was not possible in this case. The present commentary argues that this decision exaggerates the importance of the biological link, creating injustices at the expense of the child concerned. In conclusion, the commentary calls for a more consistent and holistic framework to protect the best interests of the child and to prevent abuses of transnational commercial surrogacy.","PeriodicalId":39602,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law International","volume":"21 1","pages":"272 - 285"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09685332211043499","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The present commentary analyses and discusses the Fjölnisdóttir et al. v. Iceland decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) of 18 May 2021. The case concerned an Icelandic couple who had been recognised as the legal parents of a child born by a surrogate mother in California. In contrast to most other surrogacy cases decided by the ECtHR, however, the child had no biological link to either of the intended parents. The ECtHR thus found that a ruling of the Supreme Court of Iceland which had rejected the recognition of the legal parenthood of the intended parents under Icelandic law had not violated Art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, despite the fact that joint adoption by the intended parents was not possible in this case. The present commentary argues that this decision exaggerates the importance of the biological link, creating injustices at the expense of the child concerned. In conclusion, the commentary calls for a more consistent and holistic framework to protect the best interests of the child and to prevent abuses of transnational commercial surrogacy.
代孕案件中的父母是什么?对欧洲人权法院Fjölnisdóttir等人诉冰岛案裁决的反思
本评注分析和讨论了2021年5月18日欧洲人权法院对Fjölnisdóttir等人诉冰岛案的裁决。该案件涉及一对冰岛夫妇,他们被认定为加利福尼亚州代孕母亲所生孩子的合法父母。然而,与ECtHR决定的大多数其他代孕案例相比,孩子与任何一位意向父母都没有生物学联系。因此,欧洲人权法院认定,冰岛最高法院的一项裁决驳回了冰岛法律对准父母合法父母身份的承认,这并不违反《欧洲人权公约》第8条,尽管在本案中,准父母不可能共同收养。本评注认为,这一决定夸大了生物学联系的重要性,以牺牲有关儿童为代价制造了不公正现象。最后,评注呼吁建立一个更加一致和全面的框架,以保护儿童的最大利益,防止滥用跨国商业代孕。
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
Medical Law International
Medical Law International Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The scope includes: Clinical Negligence. Health Matters Affecting Civil Liberties. Forensic Medicine. Determination of Death. Organ and Tissue Transplantation. End of Life Decisions. Legal and Ethical Issues in Medical Treatment. Confidentiality. Access to Medical Records. Medical Complaints Procedures. Professional Discipline. Employment Law and Legal Issues within NHS. Resource Allocation in Health Care. Mental Health Law. Misuse of Drugs. Legal and Ethical Issues concerning Human Reproduction. Therapeutic Products. Medical Research. Cloning. Gene Therapy. Genetic Testing and Screening. And Related Topics.
×
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