论构成“基因歧视”的道德标准与法律标准——“基因歧视”法律问题专题研究之三

传统反歧视法判断一项"区别对待"行为是否构成"歧视",首先需要借助道德判断标准.如果"区别对待"是基于对他人人品、能力、生理等特点的错误判断,或出于不道德目的,以及会导致严重社会后果,将被道德观念认为是"歧视".此外,传统反歧视法还有特定的法律判断标准那些合乎道德准则,但却不成比例地伤害了社会弱势群体的"区别对待"被法律定为非法"间接歧视";相反,为这些社会弱势群体成员优先提供受教育、就业等机会的"反向歧视"则被定为合法行为.     

论“基因歧视”的概念——“基因歧视’法律问题专题研究之二

"基因歧视"并不是指一切以基因状况为根据的歧视,而是指根据一个人的基因状况预示他在未来可能患上某种疾病或其他状况这一信息而对他进行的歧视,即根据"基因倾向性"而进行的歧视.由于"基因歧视"这一术语译自英语,而英语中的"歧视"同时具有中性和贬义两种含义,因此在汉语中要谨慎使用"基因歧视"一词.它只应用于描述不公平、不合理的根据"基因倾向性"进行的区别对待.     

论“基因歧视”现象引发的法学课题——“基因歧视”法律问题专题研究之一

以"人类基因组计划"为标志的基因科技正在迅猛发展,"基因检测"技术也已投入临床应用.但基因科技的负面社会影响也随之产生欧美等国在保险市场、就业市场等领域,出现了保险公司和雇主要求投保人或申请人提供基因信息,并对那些具有基因缺陷、有可能在未来患上疾病的投保人或申请人提高保费、拒绝承保或不予录用的现象,被称之为"基因歧视".虽然"基因歧视"现象引起了世界各国的广泛关注、相应的立法不断出现,但与"基因歧视"有关的一系列基本理论问题尚未得到研究和解决.本文提出应当对"基因歧视"的概念、法律应当禁止的"基因歧视"的范围、构成"歧视"的行为性质、立法的基本策略和方法等课题进行研究,以期为立法提供理论指引.     

患者基因隐私权的法律保护

患者的基因信息与其生理状况密切相关,一旦泄露将使其陷入困境。为保护患者的权益,应将患者基因信息列入到民法保护的隐私范畴,明确确立基因隐私权,同时规定侵害基因隐私权的除外情形。     

论针对“基因歧视”的立法策略：为“基因特殊论”辩护——“基因歧视”法律问题专题研究之四

面对"基因歧视"所可能导致的严重社会后果,一些国家通过了专门立法对其加以预防和控制.但有学者认为"基因信息"也是普通的"医疗信息",立法者不应只针对由"基因信息"导致的歧视进行立法,而是应当针对所有由医疗状况引起的歧视进行立法.本文指出"基因信息"与普通医疗信息相比,具有特殊的自然特征和社会意义,在全社会普遍不能正确理解基因信息预测意义的情况下,专门立法防止由这种误解导致的"基因歧视",具有重要的现实意义.     

“中国基因歧视第一案”引发的法律思考

人类基因资源是人类非常宝贵的财富资源,然而近年来因人类基因资源的无序适用使得有关法律争议逐年上升。本文以中国基因歧视第一案为例,通过该案例中因人体基因资源使用所引发纠纷解读人类基因资源保护相关法律问题,阐明了人类基因资源保护中相关法律适用的依据及具体保护措施,旨在对现有人类基因资源的立法保护提供理论参考。     

基因隐私权与基因知情权的冲突与衡平

基因隐私权的主旨在于公民有权对自己的基因信息予以隐瞒和维护,不被外界非法知悉。而基因知情权则是相关权利主体有权依法知悉和了解基因信息,保障其知情的权利。文章通过对两者在理论和实践中的冲突进行分析研究,指出其利益均衡点,从而实现维护整个社会公平正义的目的。     

论基因时代对隐私权的法律保护

基因时代 ,随着基因技术的不断创新 ,人类能够发明并生产出高精度基因诊断工具和特效基因药物以对抗目前尚难以控制的疾病。但基因技术在给人类带来福音的同时 ,也面临着法律保护上的缺陷与空白 ,进而影响到我们的日常工作与生活 ,对此问题进行研讨有其现实性和必要性。     

基因隐私权的法律保护——基因技术面临的法律挑战

21世纪人类进入了"后基因组时代",面临着如何进一步将已经解析的基因组情报加以应用于人类各种生活领域的课题,与基因技术相关的伦理、法律以及社会问题研究成了人们关注的热点,而基因隐私权问题就是其中被重点关注的问题之一。本文从对基因信息的概念及特征分析入手,提出对基因隐私权的法律保护,这正是基因技术对所面临的法律挑战做出的必要应对措施。     

Public Reason Between Ethics and Law

Rawls says that public reason is the reason of the citizens of a democratic state and takes the Supreme Court in the USA as the exemplar of public reason. It differs from non public reason, which is used e.g., in universities and academic institutions. Rawls contrasts with Kant, which opposes the public reason of the scholar??or the philosopher??, who speaks before the world, to the private reason of state or church officials. The later, once they accept an authority, cannot think by themselves (selbst denken). A closer examination shows that Rawls is not so far from Kant as it seems, because he takes the constitutional judges not as they are, but as they should be. However Rawls still apparently refuses Kant??s unity of reason. Further investigation of the relations between ethical reason, democratic reason and legal reason is needed. Democratic reason is tantamount both to public reason and to legal reason in a modern constitutional state. It is a requirement of ethics but still not identical with ethical reason, since it is possible to accept democratic reason and to argue against it from an ethical point of view. There is just one good way of reasoning, in spite of the constraints that the sources of law and the rules of procedure impose on legal reasoning, compared with ethics. Such constraints are based on the democratic principle, which is again based on ethical reason, which at last both grounds and limits the constraints that law imposes on reason.     

The Expressionless: Law, Ethics, and the Imagery of Suffering

The essay discusses law’s inability to address the phenomenon of human suffering and, at the same time, investigates a possible theoretical kinship between Walter Benjamin’s notion of ‘the expressionless’ and Emmanuel Levinas’s understanding of suffering as the foundation of an interhuman ethics. The kinship between Levinas and Benjamin is examined with reference to suffering in the visual arts and, more specifically, in Matthias Grünewald’s Isenheim Altarpiece and Francis Bacon’s crucifixion triptychs. The essay argues that in the crucifixion scenes of both Grünewald’s medieval altarpiece and Bacon’s triptychs, suffering is what constitutes ‘the expressionless’. After every detail of the image, every element of attribute, motif, composition and colour have been accurately depicted, a residue still remains, an ethical truth that cannot be appropriated into a meaningful unity but that nevertheless calls for a response. While law must always give suffering a utilitarian value in its attempts to assign responsibility for the injury occurred, the essay argues that the fragmentariness in all true art that Benjamin calls ‘the expressionless’ is akin to Levinas’s understanding of the constitutional uselessness of suffering, its essence as ‘for nothing’.

Ethics, Law, and Commercial Surrogacy: A Call for Uniformity

In the United States at this time, no uniform federal law exists regarding commercial surrogacy, and state statutory schemes vary vastly, ranging from criminalization to legal recognition with contract enforcement. The authors examine how commercial surrogacy agencies utilize the Internet as a means for attracting parents and surrogates by employing emotional cultural rhetoric. By inducing both parents and surrogates to their jurisdiction, agencies circumvent vast discrepancies in state statutory regulative schemes and create a distinct interstate business, absent an efficient regulatory framework or legal recourse in some circumstances. The authors propose a uniform federal regulatory scheme premised upon regulating interstate business transactions to create accountability and legal remedies for both the parents and the surrogate.     

医学人体实验法律控制问题

一、医学人体实验概说医学人体实验（humanexperimentation）是指以人为医学实验的对象，用科学的方法进行有控制的对受试者进行观察和研究的医学行为过程。医学人体实验是医学理论研究和动物实验应用之后的必经阶段。药品或其他医学科研手段在大规模的应用到患者身上之前，必须小规模的在受试者身上进行实验，实验的成功与否决定着能否进入第三期临床，直至进入市场。医学人体实验是对医学研究验证不可或缺的环节，是医学研究与临床应用的中介，为现代医学研究发展提供了有利的支持和保证，是现代医学研究技术成果的支柱。无论是古代医学还…     

关于环境法体系问题的几点思考

环境法体系是法律体系意义上的概念,不是立法体系意义上概念。环境法是独立的法律部门,应区别环境法概念的广义与狭义。从狭义环境法的角度来看,环境民法、环境刑法不属于环境法。环境法体系可分为基本法与具体法,其中具体法又可分为事务法和手段法。狭义环境法的确定对于规范环境法学研究,推动环境法制建设具有积极意义。