论人体胚胎研究“软法”修改之正当性

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 Q4 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
C. Ding
{"title":"论人体胚胎研究“软法”修改之正当性","authors":"C. Ding","doi":"10.24112/ijccpm.191946","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. \nThis commentary briefly discusses the substantive and procedural justifications for amending the longstanding 14-day rule, a soft-law limitation on the culturing of human embryos. The 14-day rule was established on the basis of general recognition of the human embryo's special status, accompanied by widespread public conversation and engagement. In principle, amending this rule would require the same substantive and procedural justifications. However, such justifications were absent prior to the lifting of the rule by the ISSCR in its 2021 guidelines. This article also discusses the value and importance of the 14-day rule to the development of human embryo research in the last three decades. Discarding the rule without the proper substantive and procedural justifications is likely to damage public trust and confidence in future human embryo research.","PeriodicalId":41284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"論人體胚胎研究“軟法”修改之正當性\",\"authors\":\"C. Ding\",\"doi\":\"10.24112/ijccpm.191946\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. \\nThis commentary briefly discusses the substantive and procedural justifications for amending the longstanding 14-day rule, a soft-law limitation on the culturing of human embryos. The 14-day rule was established on the basis of general recognition of the human embryo's special status, accompanied by widespread public conversation and engagement. In principle, amending this rule would require the same substantive and procedural justifications. However, such justifications were absent prior to the lifting of the rule by the ISSCR in its 2021 guidelines. This article also discusses the value and importance of the 14-day rule to the development of human embryo research in the last three decades. Discarding the rule without the proper substantive and procedural justifications is likely to damage public trust and confidence in future human embryo research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.191946\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.191946","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

|中文文件文本;摘要也是英文的。这篇评论简要地讨论了修改长期存在的14天规则的实质性和程序性理由,14天规则是对人类胚胎培养的软法律限制。14天规则是建立在对人类胚胎特殊地位的普遍认识的基础上,伴随着广泛的公众讨论和参与。原则上,修改这条规则需要同样的实质性和程序性理由。然而,在ISSCR在其2021年指导方针中取消该规则之前,这种理由是不存在的。本文还讨论了近三十年来14天规则对人类胚胎研究发展的价值和重要性。在没有适当的实体和程序理由的情况下抛弃这一规则可能会损害公众对未来人类胚胎研究的信任和信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
論人體胚胎研究“軟法”修改之正當性
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. This commentary briefly discusses the substantive and procedural justifications for amending the longstanding 14-day rule, a soft-law limitation on the culturing of human embryos. The 14-day rule was established on the basis of general recognition of the human embryo's special status, accompanied by widespread public conversation and engagement. In principle, amending this rule would require the same substantive and procedural justifications. However, such justifications were absent prior to the lifting of the rule by the ISSCR in its 2021 guidelines. This article also discusses the value and importance of the 14-day rule to the development of human embryo research in the last three decades. Discarding the rule without the proper substantive and procedural justifications is likely to damage public trust and confidence in future human embryo research.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
×
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