法律人格与法律行为能力:闭锁综合症的案例。

IF 2.4 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2025-08-15 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsaf015
Fernando Vidal
{"title":"法律人格与法律行为能力:闭锁综合症的案例。","authors":"Fernando Vidal","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsaf015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The situation of persons diagnosed with locked-in syndrome (LIS) raises a significant legal challenge. As a consequence of a brainstem stroke, they are quadriplegic and lack articulate speech but have normal visual perception, bodily sensations, consciousness, and cognitive functions. It is only with human and technological assistance that they can communicate, express their will, make responsible decisions, and exert their civil rights. Insofar as they can communicate, there seems in principle to be no reason for restricting their legal capacity. This, however, has not always been recognized. In the early 2000s in Spain, two men with LIS who had been declared 'incapable' and deprived of their civil rights reclaimed them in court. Rights were given back to the one who could use a computer. They were initially refused to the other, who communicated solely by blinking and depended on a human intermediary. Only the human-machine system was trusted to convey faithfully and reliably the subject's autonomous will. This article describes these two cases in their legal context and discusses how they can throw light on the exercise of legal capacity by persons with disabilities after the adoption in 2006 of the UN <i>Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"12 2","pages":"lsaf015"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12354950/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legal personhood and legal capacity: the case of the locked-in syndrome.\",\"authors\":\"Fernando Vidal\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jlb/lsaf015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The situation of persons diagnosed with locked-in syndrome (LIS) raises a significant legal challenge. As a consequence of a brainstem stroke, they are quadriplegic and lack articulate speech but have normal visual perception, bodily sensations, consciousness, and cognitive functions. It is only with human and technological assistance that they can communicate, express their will, make responsible decisions, and exert their civil rights. Insofar as they can communicate, there seems in principle to be no reason for restricting their legal capacity. This, however, has not always been recognized. In the early 2000s in Spain, two men with LIS who had been declared 'incapable' and deprived of their civil rights reclaimed them in court. Rights were given back to the one who could use a computer. They were initially refused to the other, who communicated solely by blinking and depended on a human intermediary. Only the human-machine system was trusted to convey faithfully and reliably the subject's autonomous will. This article describes these two cases in their legal context and discusses how they can throw light on the exercise of legal capacity by persons with disabilities after the adoption in 2006 of the UN <i>Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities</i>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56266,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and the Biosciences\",\"volume\":\"12 2\",\"pages\":\"lsaf015\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12354950/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and the Biosciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaf015\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaf015","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

被诊断患有闭锁综合症(LIS)的人的情况提出了一个重大的法律挑战。由于脑干中风,他们四肢瘫痪,缺乏清晰的语言,但有正常的视觉,身体感觉,意识和认知功能。只有在人力和技术的帮助下,他们才能沟通、表达自己的意愿、做出负责任的决定,并行使自己的公民权利。只要他们能够沟通,原则上似乎没有理由限制他们的法律行为能力。然而,人们并不总是认识到这一点。21世纪初,在西班牙,两名被宣布为“无行为能力”并被剥夺公民权利的男子在法庭上要求恢复他们的权利。权利还给了会使用电脑的人。他们最初拒绝了另一个人,后者仅通过眨眼交流,并依赖于人类中介。只有相信人机系统才能忠实可靠地传达主体的自主意志。本文将介绍这两个案例的法律背景,并讨论它们如何有助于了解2006年《联合国残疾人权利公约》通过后残疾人行使法律行为能力的情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Legal personhood and legal capacity: the case of the locked-in syndrome.

The situation of persons diagnosed with locked-in syndrome (LIS) raises a significant legal challenge. As a consequence of a brainstem stroke, they are quadriplegic and lack articulate speech but have normal visual perception, bodily sensations, consciousness, and cognitive functions. It is only with human and technological assistance that they can communicate, express their will, make responsible decisions, and exert their civil rights. Insofar as they can communicate, there seems in principle to be no reason for restricting their legal capacity. This, however, has not always been recognized. In the early 2000s in Spain, two men with LIS who had been declared 'incapable' and deprived of their civil rights reclaimed them in court. Rights were given back to the one who could use a computer. They were initially refused to the other, who communicated solely by blinking and depended on a human intermediary. Only the human-machine system was trusted to convey faithfully and reliably the subject's autonomous will. This article describes these two cases in their legal context and discusses how they can throw light on the exercise of legal capacity by persons with disabilities after the adoption in 2006 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

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
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
×
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