Penal provisions of Bioethics Law: problems and improvements
10.5124/jkma.2018.61.7.392
- Author:
Tae Young HA
1
Author Information
1. Law School, Dong-A University, Busan, Korea. hatyoung@dau.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Legislation
- Keywords:
Bioethics Law;
Punishment;
Sperm;
Egg cell;
Embryo
- MeSH:
Anger;
Bioethics;
Constitution and Bylaws;
Embryo Research;
Embryonic Structures;
Fertilization in Vitro;
Humans;
Insemination, Artificial;
Jurisprudence;
Korea;
Malpractice;
Personhood;
Punishment;
Social Control, Formal;
Sperm Retrieval;
Spermatozoa;
Tissue Donors;
Value of Life;
Veterans
- From:Journal of the Korean Medical Association
2018;61(7):392-402
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
Chapter 9 of the Bioethics Law has several problems due to strict research standards and strong penalties. Therefore, biomedical researchers in Korea have raised several objections to this Law. To make matters worse, the normative power of the Law is significantly diminished because norms and penalties are divergent. Articles 2, 24, 26, 27, 28, and 32 of the Law require amendment because the current regulations on sperm retrieval, sperm management, and sperm use are insufficient. At a minimum, legislation for artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization should be consolidated. It is also necessary for sperm researchers and donors to be notified of their rights and duties. Section 9 of the Bioethics Law should therefore be amended. In particular, its legal formulation should be modified in order to enhance the effectiveness of bioethics law. This is in accord with the spirit of the Constitution. The principle of proportionality should be maintained. The statutory form should be revised to the level of abortion. Not only are the actors in embryo research diverse, including medical personnel, medical institutions, donors, veterans, and mediators, but embryo research involves multiple behavioral aspects, including intentional acts and negligence (violation of state duty). Excessively free-form activity is prescribed. Although the value of life is important, heavy punishment violates human dignity and human values. This legislation should not reflect to be grounded in emotional reactions such as anger.
