Abstract
This deals with regulatory frameworks for biomedical technologies generally, and pre-implantation genetic interventions more specifically. In doing so, the chapter highlights some of the challenges in attempting to effectively regulate biomedical technologies that move at the pace of lightning speed. In addition, the chapter proposes the use of a combination of regulatory approaches, in complementarity with existing legal frameworks, to consider building a more flexible and reflexive form of governance for biomedical technologies. Further clarity may also be had in examining the development of the regulatory frameworks in the abortion debates and earlier prenatal testing technologies. These are discourses that bear a close nexus to pre-implantation genetic interventions and may impart the values and modalities in these debates to complement the role of the law or legal framework in a regulatory environment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
History ‘The 1960s - Facts & Summary’ ( history.com ) http://www.history.com/topics/1960s.
- 2.
Anthony J. Pennings, ‘Arthur C. Clarke’s Three Laws of Innovation’ Writings on Digital Strategies, ICT Economies, and Global Communications (1 July 2012), http://apennings.com/political-economies-in-sf/arthur-c-clarkes-three-laws-of-innovation/.
- 3.
The Guardian, ‘Profiles of the Future by Arthur C Clarke – Review’ The Guardian (4 March 2011) https://www.theguardian.com/science/2011/mar/04/profiles-future-arthur-clarke-review.
- 4.
Clarke (1985).
- 5.
ibid.
- 6.
Finnis (2015), p. 199.
- 7.
Brownsword and Yeung (2008), p. 5.
- 8.
Esther Inglis-Arkell, ‘Technology Isn’t Magic: Why Clarke’s Third Law Always Bugged Me’ io9 (28 April 2013) http://io9.gizmodo.com/technology-isnt-magic-why-clarkes-third-law-always-bug-479194151.
- 9.
Lessig (1999), p. 43.
- 10.
ibid 6.
- 11.
Brownsword and Yeung (2008), p. 5.
- 12.
ibid 3.
- 13.
Jonathan Freedland, ‘1984 by George Orwell, Book of a Lifetime: An Absorbing, Deeply Affecting Political Thriller’ The Independent (2 July 2015) http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/1984-by-george-orwell-book-of-a-lifetime-an-absorbing-deeply-affecting-political-thriller-10360789.html.
- 14.
Johan Norberg, ‘Why Can’t We See That We’re Living in a Golden Age?’ The Spectator (20 August 2016) https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/why-cant-we-see-that-were-living-in-a-golden-age/.
- 15.
Brownsword and Goodwin (2012), pp. 24–25.
- 16.
ibid 25. See also Black (2005), p. 11.
- 17.
Mandel (2009), pp. 75, 76.
- 18.
Lessig (1999), p. 5. It is interesting at this juncture to note that Lessig did not mean “constitution” to refer to a legal text in the manner of the United States Constitution. Instead, Lessig refers to an alternative interpretation of “constitution” that is equated with a “way of life”.
- 19.
ibid.
- 20.
Brownsword (2011), p. 207.
- 21.
ibid 208.
- 22.
Nelson and Oxley (1999), p. 1040.
- 23.
ibid 1041.
- 24.
Nelson and Oxley (1999).
- 25.
Inhorn (2003), p. 1837.
- 26.
Nemudryi et al. (2014), p. 22.
- 27.
Carroll (2011), p. 773.
- 28.
Stock (2005), p. 27.
- 29.
Foucault (1977).
- 30.
Liebert and Schmidt (2010), p. 55. See also: Brownsword and Yeung (2008). I found it compelling to give mention to the issue of the Collingridge Dilemma, which was raised by Browsword in Rights, Regulation and the Technological Revolution. The basis of the Collingridge Dilemma is essentially a trade-off process: between regulating technologies while they are still new, and their future consequences may be projected; or waiting to see how the technologies will develop over a given period of time, but then losing the ability to control the manner in which it may be regulated.
- 31.
Brownsword (2011), p. 208.
- 32.
Level Crossings, Law Commission Consultation Paper No. 194, Scottish Law Commission and Law Commission Discussion Paper No. 143, ‘Regulatory Theory’ (2010) https://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/files/5312/8024/5698/regulatory_theory.pdf.
- 33.
ibid.
- 34.
This is particularly accurate because of the global economic slump and boom in the late 1960s period, which led to the approach of “regulation theory”, a derivative of Marxist economic theory as a means of dealing with capitalism, a shift in the industrial regime, and development in society. However, regulatory theory is not the same as “regulation” theory, although it may be said that the underlying purposes of these theories address the linkage between legal, social, cultural and political contexts.
- 35.
Ayres and Braithwaite (1992).
- 36.
Baldwin and Cave (1999).
- 37.
ibid.
- 38.
Drahos (2017).
- 39.
ibid 3–4.
- 40.
ibid 4.
- 41.
ibid.
- 42.
Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan or the Matter, Forme, & Power of a Common-Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civill. (Andrew Crooke at the Green Dragon in St Paul’s Church-yard 1651) https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/hobbes/Leviathan.pdf.
- 43.
Drahos (2017), p. 12.
- 44.
ibid 14.
- 45.
Foucault and Gordon (1980), p. 98.
- 46.
Drahos (2017), p. 17.
- 47.
ibid 16.
- 48.
Braithwaite (2017b), p. 28.
- 49.
ibid 26.
- 50.
ibid 27.
- 51.
ibid 29.
- 52.
ibid. Braithwaite further refers to the work of Meidinger (1987), pp. 355–386. A ‘regulatory community’ is one where there are groups of regulatory actors comprised through “different subcultural groups with their own values, normal, beliefs and processes.” The idea of a ‘regulatory community’ is that it is powerful enough to either support by extension, or even undermine, regulatory authorities.
- 53.
Hume (1896).
- 54.
Drahos (2017), p. 17.
- 55.
ibid 16.
- 56.
ibid 18.
- 57.
Ayres and Braithwaite (1992).
- 58.
OECD, ‘Biomedicine and Health Innovation: Synthesis Report’ (2010) http://www.oecd.org/health/biotech/46925602.pdf.
- 59.
ibid 14.
- 60.
ibid 15.
- 61.
ibid 17.
- 62.
ibid 18.
- 63.
These international instruments will be more specifically expanded on in Chap. 5.
- 64.
UNESCO, ‘Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights (11 November 1997)’ http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13177&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.
- 65.
UNESCO, ‘The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (2006)’ http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001461/146180E.pdf.
- 66.
Conseil de l’Europe, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with Regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (Editions du Conseil de l’Europe 1997) http://193.205.211.30/lawtech/images/lawtech/law/convenzioneoviedo.pdf.
- 67.
European Medicines Agency, ‘Report of the EMA Expert Meeting on Genome Editing Technologies Used in Medicinal Product Development’ (European Medicines Agency 2018) EMA/47066/2018.
- 68.
European Commission JRC Science for Policy, ‘JRCF7- Knowledge Health and Consumer Safety, Overview of EU National Legislation on Genomics’ (European Commission 2018) EUR29404EN http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC113479/policy_report_-_review_of_eu_national_legislation_on_genomics_-_with_identifiers.pdf.
- 69.
World Medical Association, ‘WMA Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects’ (19 October 2013) https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/.
- 70.
Kleinlein (2012), p. 703.
- 71.
This does not mean that I do not accept the universality of some common values and legal norms that are recognized in international law. However, the rhetoric of the “Asian values” principles which may, in the past, sometimes been unfairly categorized as the negative aspects of cultural relativism, can provide some insight into the contemporary motivations that influence regulation-shaping in some Asian countries.
- 72.
Harmon (2016), p. 680.
- 73.
ibid 681.
- 74.
ibid 683.
- 75.
Although Harmon’s article appears to focus on precision or personalized medicine, and biobanking/data sharing, the import of the components he has suggested have the aim of ensuring the biomedical regulation are timely, critical, safe and effective.
- 76.
Harmon (2016), p. 684.
- 77.
ibid 685.
- 78.
ibid.
- 79.
ibid.
- 80.
ibid 683. Harmon refers to LF as “a future oriented process aimed at identifying and exploring possible and desirable legal or quasi-legal interventions directed at better achieving valued social and technological ends.”
- 81.
ibid 682., March 10, 2016, and Shawn H.E. Harmon ‘Evidence, Engagement and Transparency in Decision-Making’, presented at Canadian Centre for Vaccinology, June 10, 2016.
- 82.
Laurie et al. (2012), p. 1.
- 83.
Harmon (2016), p. 682.
- 84.
Ayres and Braithwaite (1992). This responsive approach also includes the exercise of a ‘soft law’ approach and self-governance regulatory mechanisms. In Section 4.1.3 of this chapter, p. 185, I provide further illustration on this regulatory approach and how it may benefit the fluid nature of biomedical technologies and yet achieve a necessary balance from a legal perspective.
- 85.
Scottish Law Commission and Law Commission (2010). The smart regulation approach is a multi-level, multi-lateral regulatory approach that employs a broad range of tools in regulation, and reaches multiple layers of stakeholders that are relevant to the regulatory dynamics of the system.
- 86.
Van Klink (2016).
- 87.
Poort et al. (2016), p. 1.
- 88.
Ayres and Braithwaite (1992).
- 89.
Parker (2013), p. 2, 2.
- 90.
Nielsen and Parker (2009), p. 376.
- 91.
ibid 379.
- 92.
ibid 378.
- 93.
Ayres and Braithwaite (1992), p. 39. Please see: Figure 2.3, p. 39.
- 94.
- 95.
ibid. Please see also: Braithwaite and Drahos (2000).
- 96.
Braithwaite (2017a), p. 117.
- 97.
Ayres and Braithwaite (1992), p. 40.
- 98.
ibid 39.
- 99.
Engeli and Rothmayr (2016), p. 248.
- 100.
ibid 249.
- 101.
ibid.
- 102.
Gunningham et al. (1998).
- 103.
Gunningham and Sinclair (2017).
- 104.
ibid 139.
- 105.
ibid 135.
- 106.
ibid 140.
- 107.
ibid 141.
- 108.
ibid 140.
- 109.
ibid 141.
- 110.
ibid 145.
- 111.
Please see: Baldwin and Black (2008), pp. 59–94; Bocher, M and Toller, AE 2003. Conditions for the emergence of alternative environmental policy instruments, paper presented at the Second European Consortium of Political Research Conference, Marburg, Germany, 18–21 September. Some of the criticism leveled against smart regulation is that it fails to take into account and address “institutional issues, compliance type specific responses, performance sensitivity and adaptability of regulatory regimes.”
- 112.
- 113.
van Klink (2016).
- 114.
ibid.
- 115.
ibid 22.
- 116.
Poort et al. (2016), p. 3.
- 117.
ibid.
- 118.
ibid 4.
- 119.
- 120.
Brownsword and Yeung (2008), p. 373.
- 121.
ibid 367.
- 122.
ibid 373–381.
- 123.
Brownsword (2011), p. 209.
- 124.
Posner (2006), p. 1049.
- 125.
Sajó and Ryan (2016), p. 3.
- 126.
ibid 4.
- 127.
ibid 8.
- 128.
Brownsword (2008), pp. 31–131.
- 129.
ibid 31.
- 130.
ibid 35.
- 131.
ibid 70.
- 132.
ibid 100.
- 133.
Brownsword (2008), p. 209.
- 134.
ibid.
- 135.
ibid. See also (n 44).
- 136.
Brownsword (2008), p. 24.
- 137.
ibid 273.
- 138.
‘The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights’ (2006).
- 139.
Brownsword (2008), p. 35.
- 140.
ibid.
- 141.
ibid 31.
- 142.
Burns (2005), p. 46.
- 143.
‘The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights’ (2006). Article 4 states: “In applying and advancing scientific knowledge, medical practice and associated technologies, direct and indirect benefit to patients, research participants and other affected individuals should be maximized and any possible harm to such individuals should be minimized.”
- 144.
Bentham et al. (1988).
- 145.
Brownsword (2008), p. 37.
- 146.
ibid 36.
- 147.
ibid 37.
- 148.
‘The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights’ (2006). Article 3(2) of the Declaration stipulates that “the interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society.”
- 149.
Brownsword (2008), p. 37.
- 150.
ibid.
- 151.
ibid 39.
- 152.
ibid.
- 153.
ibid.
- 154.
Francioni (2007), p. 50.
- 155.
Brownsword (2008), p. 39.
- 156.
Francioni (2007), p. 51.
- 157.
Brownsword (2008), p. 41.
- 158.
ibid.
- 159.
ibid 42–43.
- 160.
Brownsword (2008), p. 43.
- 161.
Schloendorff v The Society of the New York Hospital (1914) 211 NY 125 (The Court of Appeals of New York).
- 162.
Aveyard (2002), p. 201.
- 163.
Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789, p. 864 per Lord Goff: “…The principle of self determination requires that respect must be given to the wishes of the patient…..the principle of the sanctity of human life must yield to the principle of self-determination…and…the physician’s duty to act in the best interests of his patient must likewise be qualified.”
- 164.
Brownsword (2008), p. 71.
- 165.
‘The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights’ (2006). See Article 6.1 and Article 6.2 of the Declaration, which provides for the “prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned”, whether in connection to any medical intervention or scientific research.
- 166.
Brownsword (2008), p. 70.
- 167.
ibid 75. Here, Brownsword also refers to Beyleveld and Brownsword (2007).
- 168.
ibid 102. We will find, that in looking at the challenge of legitimacy in pluralistic environments, where questions about the meaning of ‘harm’ and the precautionary principle has to be balanced on an equal footing, the positioning of views and perspectives within the bioethical triangle is once again considered.
- 169.
ibid 98.
- 170.
ibid 24. See also (n 49) and (n 50).
- 171.
ibid 92.
- 172.
ibid 87.
- 173.
ibid 100.
- 174.
ibid.
- 175.
ibid 101.
- 176.
Peter (2008), p. 33.
- 177.
Brownsword (2008), p. 101.
- 178.
Peter (2008), p. 33.
- 179.
Brownsword (2008), p. 101.
- 180.
ten Have and Jean (2009).
- 181.
Brownsword (2008), p. 102.
- 182.
ibid 102–105. Brownsword elaborates on the employability of the meaning of ‘harm’ in the context of the pluralistic perspectives of the bioethical triangle, encompassing the human rights perspective, the utilitarian view and the dignitarian standards. The determination of ‘harm’ in these varying ethical viewpoints further contributes to the difficulty of pluralism, as an additional layer of determinative considerations.
- 183.
‘The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights’ (2006). Article 17 states: “Due regard is to be given to the interconnection between human beings and other forms of life, to the importance of appropriate access and utilization of biological and genetic resource, to respect for traditional knowledge and to the role of human beings in the protection of the environment, the biosphere and biodiversity.”
- 184.
ten Have and Jean (2009).
- 185.
Brownsword (2008), p. 132.
- 186.
ibid.
- 187.
ibid 133.
- 188.
ibid 134.
- 189.
Biegel (2001).
- 190.
ibid 353–364.
- 191.
Brownsword (2008), p. 145.
- 192.
ibid 146.
- 193.
ibid 138.
- 194.
ibid.
- 195.
ibid 139–150.
- 196.
ibid 139.
- 197.
ibid.
- 198.
ibid 140.
- 199.
ibid 141.
- 200.
ibid 142.
- 201.
Bimber (1990), p. 333.
- 202.
ibid 335.
- 203.
Phillips (1995), p. 5.
- 204.
Dafoe (2015), p. 1047.
- 205.
ibid 1050.
- 206.
ibid.
- 207.
Kant (2003).
- 208.
Dafoe (2015), p. 1051.
- 209.
ibid 1054.
- 210.
Brownsword (2008), p. 160.
- 211.
ibid.
- 212.
Fuller (1969).
- 213.
Brownsword (2008), p. 161.
- 214.
ibid 160.
- 215.
Fuller (1969).
- 216.
Ribeiro (2001), p. 2842.
- 217.
Brownsword (2008), p. 185.
- 218.
ibid 186.
- 219.
ibid.
- 220.
Somek (2014).
- 221.
Brownsword (2008), p. 186.
- 222.
Somek (2014), p. 242.
- 223.
ibid 22–23.
- 224.
Brownsword (2008), p. 187.
- 225.
Uitz (2015), p. 279.
- 226.
Jan-Werner Müller, ‘The Problem with Poland’ The New York Review of Books (11 February 2016) http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/02/11/kaczynski-eu-problem-with-poland/ See also Christian Keszthelyi, ‘Government’s “Stop Brussels” Campaign Revs Up’, Budapest Business Journal (2 May 2017) http://bbj.hu/politics/governments-stop-brussels-campaign-revs-up_132259.
- 227.
Somek (2014), p. 22.
- 228.
Patterson et al. (2015), p. 667, 676.
- 229.
Somek (2014), p. 253.
- 230.
Galen Strawson, ‘Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind by Yuval Noah Harari – Review’ The Guardian (11 September 2014) https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/sep/11/sapiens-brief-history-humankind-yuval-noah-harari-review.
- 231.
Harari (2015), p. 162.
- 232.
Harari (2015).
- 233.
ibid 246.
- 234.
ibid 274.
- 235.
ibid 266.
- 236.
Gibbs (2014), p. 168. Project Gilgamesh, deriving its name from the ‘Epic of Gilgamesh’, the mythical King of Uruk, is an initiative that is focused on the extension of human life and the control of human aging through scientific and medical technologies. Similar to the SENS Research Foundation project on aging, Project Gilgamesh advocates the use of science, cryonics and other methods for radical life extension as its key moral imperatives. See also: http://www.projectgilgamesh.com/what-is-project-gilgamesh/.
- 237.
Trebilcock and Iacobucci (2009), p. 455, 457.
- 238.
Liebert and Schmidt (2010).
- 239.
Collingridge (1982).
- 240.
‘Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)’ (Justia Law) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/.
- 241.
Callahan (1986), p. 33.
- 242.
ibid 33.
- 243.
ibid 34.
- 244.
Cannon (1991), p. 812.
- 245.
Stacie Taranto, ‘How Abortion Became the Single Most Important Litmus Test in American Politics’ The Washington Post (22 January 2018) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/01/22/how-abortion-became-the-single-most-important-litmus-test-in-american-politics/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b4015648272b.
- 246.
Noonan (1977), p. 29.
- 247.
Lee, Michelle Yee Hee, ‘Donald Trump’s Claim He Evolved into “pro-Life” Views, like Ronald Reagan’ The Washington Post (31 March 2016) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/31/donald-trumps-claim-he-evolved-into-pro-life-views-like-ronald-reagan/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a98e5a4e62f8.
- 248.
Megan Farokhmanesh, ‘How a Trump Administration Threatens Women’s Health’, The Verge (12 December 2016) https://www.theverge.com/2016/12/12/13904032/trump-womens-reproductive-health-affordable-care-planned-parenthood.
- 249.
Jon Kelly, ‘Why Are Northern Ireland’s Abortion Laws Different?’ BBC News (8 April 2016) http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35980195.
- 250.
Case of A, B and C v Ireland [2010] Grand Chamber 25579/05.
- 251.
BBC, ‘Abortion “Would Have Saved Wife”’ BBC News (14 November 2012) http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-20321741.
- 252.
Allison O’Connor, ‘How the Death of Savita Halappanavar Changed the Abortion Debate’, The Irish Examiner (28 October 2017) http://www.irishexaminer.com/analysis/how-the-death-of-savita-halappanavar-changed-the-abortion-debate-461787.html.
- 253.
Tom Gotsis and Laura Ismay, ‘Abortion Law: A National Perspective, Briefing Paper No. 2/2017’ NSW Parliamentary Research Service https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/Documents/Abortion%20Law.pdf.
- 254.
In other Australian states, abortion is legal up until a period of time, or such other expressly stipulated condition in the relevant State statutes. For example, in the Australian Capital Territory and South Australia, abortion is legal if medically agreed upon by 2 doctors that it would be necessary for the benefit of the woman’s physical or mental health. In Victoria, Tasmania, Western Australia and the Northern Territory, abortion is legal up until a specified period of time, after which special considerations may apply.
- 255.
International Women’s Development Agency (IWDA) ‘Reproductive Rights, Abortion & Zoe’s Law: Why Freedom of Choice Is Still Feminism’s Biggest Fight’ (26 April 2015) https://iwda.org.au/reproductive-rights-abortion-zoes-law-why-freedom-of-choice-is-still-feminisms-biggest-fight/.
- 256.
Crimes Amendment (Zoe’s Law) Bill 2017 https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bills/Pages/bill-details.aspx?pk=2936.
- 257.
Christina M.H. Powell, ‘Being Human: How Should We Define Life and Personhood?’ Enrichment Journal http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/201002/201002_134_define_person.cfm.
- 258.
Crimes Amendment (Zoe’s Law) Bill 2017 (n 256).
- 259.
Jenny Noyes, ‘On Zoe’s Law, And The Accidental/On Purpose Erosion Of Your Reproductive Rights’ Junkee (21 November 2013) http://junkee.com/on-zoes-law-and-the-accidentalon-purpose-erosion-of-your-reproductive-rights/21659.
- 260.
ibid.
- 261.
Crimes Amendment (Zoe’s Law) Bill 2017 (n 256).
- 262.
Kelsey Munro, ‘Fred Nile Gives Renewed Push to Zoe’s Law to Criminalise Harm to a Fetus’, Sydney Morning Herald (10 March 2017) http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/fred-nile-gives-renewed-push-to-zoes-law-to-criminalise-harm-to-a-fetus-20170309-guup40.html.
- 263.
Callahan (1986).
- 264.
ibid 34.
- 265.
ibid 35.
- 266.
ibid 38.
- 267.
Erdman (2015), p. 39.
- 268.
ibid.
- 269.
Callahan (1986), p. 34.
- 270.
Kamel (2013), p. 156.
- 271.
Suter (2002), p. 233.
- 272.
ibid 235.
- 273.
National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) ‘An Overview of the Human Genome Project’ https://www.genome.gov/12011238/an-overview-of-the-human-genome-project/.
- 274.
Suter (2002), p. 252.
- 275.
Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing: Ethical Issues (2017).
- 276.
ibid.
- 277.
ibid 2.
- 278.
The NHS is the UK’s National Health Service under the Department of Health and Social Care. It is an executive but non-governmental public body that is primarily tasked with the management, sustainability and development of health care in the UK.
- 279.
Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2017), p. 2.
- 280.
ibid.
- 281.
The scope of PGD services is presently being regulated under the purview of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority in the UK.
- 282.
Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Genome Editing: An Ethical Review (2016).
- 283.
ibid 117.
- 284.
Maturo (2012), p. 122.
- 285.
Parens (2013), p. 28.
- 286.
Morrison (2016), p. 720.
- 287.
Sanders (2017), p. 14. The reality however is that at present, there appears to be at least 52 identifiable genes that are linked to human intelligence and these do not work in isolation, but with each other. As such, it is not yet possible at this juncture to simply “edit” the relevant genes that influence human intelligence because an alteration to one gene linking intelligence is likely to influence another linked human intelligence gene. Nevertheless, the prospect of such possibilities in the future should, in any event, be considered.
- 288.
Sandel (2004), p. 51. Sandel provides illustrative examples of athletes and questions the significance between ‘doping’ in sports and genetic enhancements to improve athletic prowess.
- 289.
Bell (2016), p. 39.
- 290.
ibid 44.
- 291.
Parens (2013), p. 29.
- 292.
ibid 35.
- 293.
Trebilcock and Iacobucci (2009), p. 455.
- 294.
ibid 457. Foreword, p. vii.
- 295.
ibid 458.
- 296.
ibid 459.
- 297.
Brownsword (2008).
- 298.
‘United States v. Carolene Products Co. 304 U.S. 144 (1938)’ (Justia Law) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/304/144/case.html.
- 299.
Exploring Constitutional Conflicts, ‘Levels of Scrutiny Under the Equal Protection Clause’ http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/epcscrutiny.htm.
- 300.
Sweet and Mathews (2008), p. 72.
- 301.
Barak (2012), p. 131.
- 302.
ibid.
- 303.
ibid.
- 304.
Stockholm Resilience Centre, ‘Adaptive Governance’ (6 December 2010) http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-streames/stewardship/adaptive-governance-.html.
- 305.
ibid.
- 306.
Chaffin et al. (2014), p. 56.
- 307.
ibid.
- 308.
ibid.
- 309.
ibid.
- 310.
Trebilcock and Iacobucci (2009), p. 460.
- 311.
ibid.
- 312.
ibid 461.
- 313.
ibid 462.
- 314.
ibid.
- 315.
ibid 463.
- 316.
ibid 464.
- 317.
ibid.
- 318.
Lessig (1997), p. 181.
- 319.
ibid 181.
- 320.
Lessig (1999).
- 321.
Lessig (1997).
- 322.
ibid.
- 323.
Brownsword (2008), p. 13.
- 324.
ibid.
- 325.
Lessig (1999), p. 87.
- 326.
ibid 88.
- 327.
Lessig (2006), p. 4.
- 328.
ibid.
- 329.
ibid.
- 330.
Lessig (2001).
- 331.
Cosens et al. (2017), p. 30.
- 332.
Dietz et al. (2003), p. 1907.
- 333.
ibid 1908.
- 334.
ibid.
- 335.
Foucault and Gordon (1980).
- 336.
Dietz et al. (2003).
- 337.
ibid 1909.
- 338.
ibid.
- 339.
Cosens et al. (2017), p. 32.
- 340.
ibid.
- 341.
ibid 33.
- 342.
ibid 35.
- 343.
ibid.
- 344.
Brownsword and Goodwin (2012), p. 27.
- 345.
ibid.
- 346.
ibid 26.
References
Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789
Aveyard H (2002) Implied consent prior to nursing care procedures. J Adv Nurs 39:201
Ayres I, Braithwaite J (1992) Responsive regulation: transcending the deregulation debate. Oxford University Press
Baldwin R, Black J (2008) Really responsive regulation. Modern Law Rev 71:59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2008.00681.x
Baldwin R, Cave M (1999) Understanding regulation: theory, strategy, and practice. Oxford University Press
Barak A (2012) Proportionality: constitutional rights and their limitations. Cambridge University Press
BBC News (14 November 2012) Abortion “Would Have Saved Wife”. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-20321741
Bell AV (2016) The margins of medicalization: diversity and context through the case of infertility. Soc Sci Med 156:39
Bentham J, Burns JH, Hart HLA (1988) A fragment on government. Cambridge University Press
Beyleveld D, Brownsword R (2007) Consent in the law. Hart, Oxford
Biegel S (2001) Beyond our control?: confronting the limits of our legal system in the age of cyberspace. MIT Press
Bimber B (1990) Karl Marx and the three faces of technological determinism. Soc Stud Sci 20:333
Black J (2005) What is regulatory innovation? In: Black J, Lodge M, Thatcher M (eds) Regulatory innovation. Edward Elgar
Braithwaite J (2002) Restorative justice and responsive regulation. Oxford University Press
Braithwaite J (2017a) Types of responsiveness. In: Drahos P (ed) Regulatory theory: foundations and applications. Australian National University Press
Braithwaite J, Drahos P (2000) Global business regulation. Cambridge University Press
Braithwaite V (2017b) Closing the gap between regulation and the community. In: Drahos P (ed) Regulatory theory: foundations and applications. Australian National University Press
Brownsword R (2008) Rights, regulation, and the technological revolution. Oxford University Press
Brownsword R (2011) Why I Wrote … rights, regulation, and the technological revolution. Clin Ethics 6:207
Brownsword R, Goodwin M (2012) Law and the technologies of the twenty-first century. Cambridge University Press
Brownsword R, Yeung K (2008) Regulating technologies: legal futures, regulatory frames and technological fixes. Hart
Burns JH (2005) Happiness and utility: Jeremy Bentham’s equation. Utilitas 17:46
Callahan D (1986) How technology is reframing the abortion debate. Hastings Center Rep 16:33
Cannon L (1991) President Reagan: the role of a lifetime. Public Affairs
Carroll D (2011) Genome engineering with Zinc-Finger nucleases. Genetics 188:773
Case of A, B and C v Ireland [2010] Grand Chamber 25579/05
Chaffin BC, Gosnell H, Cosens BA (2014) A decade of adaptive governance scholarship: synthesis and future directions. Ecol Soc 19:56
Clarke AC (1985) Profiles of the future, 1st edn. Warner Books
Collingridge D (1982) The social control of technology. St Martin’s Press
Conseil de l’Europe (1997) Convention for the protection of human rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the application of biology and medicine: convention on human rights and biomedicine. Editions du Conseil de l’Europe. http://193.205.211.30/lawtech/images/lawtech/law/convenzioneoviedo.pdf
Cosens BA et al (2017) The role of law in adaptive governance. Ecol Soc 22:30
Crimes Amendment (Zoe’s Law) Bill 2017. https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bills/Pages/bill-details.aspx?pk=2936
Dafoe A (2015) On technological determinism: a typology, scope conditions, and a mechanism. Sci Technol Human Values 40:1047
Dietz T, Ostrom E, Stern PC (2003) The struggle to govern the commons. Science 302:1907
Drahos P (ed) (2017) Regulatory theory foundations and applications. Australian National University Press
Engeli I, Rothmayr CA (2016) When doctors shape policy: the impact of self-regulation on governing human biotechnology: when doctors shape policy. Regul Gov 10:248
Erdman JN (2015) The politics of global abortion rights. Brown J World Aff 39:22
European Commission JRC Science for Policy EC (2018) ‘JRCF7- Knowledge Health and Consumer Safety, Overview of EU National Legislation on Genomics. European Commission. EUR29404EN. http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC113479/policy_report_-_review_of_eu_national_legislation_on_genomics_-_with_identifiers.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2018) Report of the EMA Expert Meeting on Genome Editing Technologies Used in Medicinal Product Development. European Medicines Agency. EMA/47066/2018
Exploring Constitutional Conflicts ‘Levels of Scrutiny Under the Equal Protection Clause’. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/epcscrutiny.htm
Farokhmanesh M (12 December 2016) How a Trump Administration Threatens Women’s Health. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2016/12/12/13904032/trump-womens-reproductive-health-affordable-care-planned-parenthood
Finnis J (2015) Grounding human rights in natural law. Am J Jurisprud 60:199
Foucault M (1977) Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison. Vintage Books, Random House
Foucault M, Gordon C (1980) Power/knowledge: selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977, 1st American edn. Pantheon Books
Francioni F (2007) Biotechnologies and international human rights. Bloomsbury Publishing
Freedland J (2 July 2015) 1984 by George Orwell, Book of a Lifetime: An Absorbing, Deeply Affecting Political Thriller. The Independent. http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/1984-by-george-orwell-book-of-a-lifetime-an-absorbing-deeply-affecting-political-thriller-10360789.html
Fuller LL (1969) The morality of law. Yale University Press
Gibbs WW (2014) Biomarkers and aging: the clock-watcher. Nature 508:168
Gotsis T, Ismay L. Abortion Law: A National Perspective, Briefing Paper No. 2/2017. NSW Parliamentary Research Service. https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/Documents/Abortion%20Law.pdf
Gunningham N, Sinclair D (2017) Smart regulation. In: Drahos P (ed) Regulatory theory: foundations and applications. Australian National University Press
Gunningham N, Grabosky P, Sinclair D (1998) Smart regulation: designing environmental policy. Clarendon Press
Harari YN (2015) Sapiens: a brief history of humankind, 1st edn. Harper
Harmon SHE (2016) Modernizing biomedical regulation: foresight and values in the promotion of responsible research and innovation. J Law Biosci 3:680
Harryono M et al (2006) Thailand medical tourism cluster. Harvard Business School Microeconomics of Competitiveness
History, ‘The 1960s - Facts & Summary’. ( HISTORY.com ) http://www.history.com/topics/1960s
Hobbes T. Leviathan or the Matter, Forme, & Power of a Common-Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civill. Andrew Crooke at the Green Dragon in St Paul’s Church-yard 1651. https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/hobbes/Leviathan.pdf
Hume D (1896) A treatise of human nature. Oxford University Press
Inglis-Arkell E (28 April 2013) Technology isn’t magic: why Clarke’s third law always bugged me. io9. http://io9.gizmodo.com/technology-isnt-magic-why-clarkes-third-law-always-bug-479194151
Inhorn MC (2003) Global infertility and the globalization of new reproductive technologies: illustrations from Egypt. Soc Sci Med 56:1837
International Women’s Development Agency (IWDA) (26 April 2015) Reproductive Rights, Abortion & Zoe’s Law: Why Freedom of Choice Is Still Feminism’s Biggest Fight. https://iwda.org.au/reproductive-rights-abortion-zoes-law-why-freedom-of-choice-is-still-feminisms-biggest-fight/
Kamel RMA (2013) Assisted reproductive technology after the birth of Louise Brown, vol 3. Gynecol Obstet, p 156
Kant I (2003) The critique of pure reason. JMD Meiklejohn tr, The Project Gutenberg
Kelly J (8 April 2016) Why are Northern Ireland’s abortion laws different? BBC News. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35980195
Keszthelyi C (2 May 2017) Government’s “Stop Brussels” Campaign Revs Up. Budapest Bus J. http://bbj.hu/politics/governments-stop-brussels-campaign-revs-up_132259
Kleinlein T (2012) Constitutionalization of international law. Das Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 231:703
Laurie G, Harmon SHE, Arzuaga F (2012) Foresighting futures: law, new technologies, and the challenges of regulating for uncertainty. Law Innov Technol 4:1
Lee MYH (31 March 2016) Donald Trump’s Claim He Evolved into “pro-Life” Views, like Ronald Reagan. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/31/donald-trumps-claim-he-evolved-into-pro-life-views-like-ronald-reagan/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a98e5a4e62f8
Lessig L (1997) The constitution of code: limitations on choice-based critiques of cyberspace regulation. Commlaw Conspectus: J Commun Law Technol Policy 5:181
Lessig L (1999) Code and other laws of cyberspace. Basic Books
Lessig L (2001) The future of ideas: the fate of the commons in a connected world, 1st edn. Random House
Lessig L (2006) Code: Version 2.0, 2nd edn. Basic Books
Level Crossings, Law Commission Consultation Paper No. 194, Scottish Law Commission and Law Commission Discussion Paper No. 143, ‘Regulatory Theory’ (2010). https://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/files/5312/8024/5698/regulatory_theory.pdf
Liebert W, Schmidt JC (2010) Collingridge’s Dilemma and technoscience: an attempt to provide a clarification from the perspective of the philosophy of science. Poiesis Praxis 7:55
Mandel GN (2009) Regulating emerging technologies. Law Innov Technol 1:75
Maturo A (2012) Medicalization: current concept and future directions in a bionic society. Mens Sana Monogr 10:122
Meidinger E (1987) Regulatory culture: a theoretical outline. Law Policy 9(4):355–386
Mohd Mutalip SS (2012) Promoting Malaysia through “fertility” tourism. J Tourism Hosp Culinary Arts 4:1
Morrison M (2016) Overdiagnosis, medicalisation and social justice: commentary on Carter et al (2016) ‘A definition and ethical evaluation of overdiagnosis. J Med Ethics 42:720
Müller J-W (11 February 2016) The problem with Poland. The New York Review of Books. http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/02/11/kaczynski-eu-problem-with-poland/
Munro K (10 March 2017) Fred Nile gives renewed push to Zoe’s law to criminalise harm to a fetus. The Sydney Morning Herald. http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/fred-nile-gives-renewed-push-to-zoes-law-to-criminalise-harm-to-a-fetus-20170309-guup40.html
National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) ‘An Overview of the Human Genome Project’. https://www.genome.gov/12011238/an-overview-of-the-human-genome-project/
Nelson TE, Oxley ZM (1999) Issue framing effects on belief importance and opinion. J Polit 61:1040
Nemudryi AA et al (2014) TALEN and CRISPR/Cas genome editing systems: tools of discovery. Acta Naturae 6:22
Nielsen VL, Parker C (2009) Testing responsive regulation in regulatory enforcement. Regul Gov 3:376
Noonan JT (1977) Abortion in the American context. Human Life Rev 3:29
Norberg J (20 August 2016) ‘Why can’t we see that we’re living in a golden age? The Spectator. https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/why-cant-we-see-that-were-living-in-a-golden-age/
Noyes J (21 November 2013) ‘On Zoe’s law, and the accidental/on purpose erosion of your reproductive rights. Junkee. http://junkee.com/on-zoes-law-and-the-accidentalon-purpose-erosion-of-your-reproductive-rights/21659
Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2016) Genome editing: an ethical review. Nuffield Council on Bioethics
Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2017) Non-invasive prenatal testing: ethical issues. Nuffield Council on Bioethics
O’Connor A (28 October 2017) How the death of Savita Halappanavar changed the abortion debate. The Irish Examiner. http://www.irishexaminer.com/analysis/how-the-death-of-savita-halappanavar-changed-the-abortion-debate-461787.html
OECD (2010) Biomedicine and Health Innovation: Synthesis Report. http://www.oecd.org/health/biotech/46925602.pdf
Parens E (2013) On good and bad forms of medicalization. Bioethics 27:28
Parker C (2013) Twenty years of responsive regulation: an appreciation and appraisal: twenty years of responsive regulation. Regul Gov 7:2
Patterson D et al (2015) The dark future of constitutionalism: the cosmopolitan constitution. Const Commentary 30:667
Pennings AJ (1 July 2012) Arthur C. Clarke’s three laws of innovation. Writings on Digital Strategies, ICT Economies, and Global Communications. http://apennings.com/political-economies-in-sf/arthur-c-clarkes-three-laws-of-innovation/
Peter F (2008) Pure epistemic proceduralism. Episteme: A J Soc Epistemol 5:33
Phillips DC (1995) The good, the bad, and the ugly: the many faces of constructivism. Edu Res 24:5
Poort L, van Beers B, van Klink B (2016) Introduction: symbolic dimensions of biolaw. In: Symbolic legislation theory and developments in biolaw. Springer
Posner RA (2006) The role of the judge in the twenty-first century. BUL Rev 86:1049
Powell CMH. Being human: how should we define life and personhood? Enrichment Journal. http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/201002/201002_134_define_person.cfm
Ribeiro GL (2001) Cosmopolitanism. Int Encycl Soc Behav Sci 4:2842
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) (Justia Law). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/
Sajó A, Ryan C (2016) Judicial reasoning and new technologies: framing, newness, fundamental rights and the internet. In: Pollicino O, Romeo G (eds) The internet and constitutional law. The protection of fundamental rights and constitutional adjudication. Routledge
Sandel M (2004) The case against perfection. Atl Mon 51:293
Sanders L (2017) 40 more genes linked to intelligence. Sci News 191:14
Schloendorff v The Society of the New York Hospital (1914) 211 NY 125 (The Court of Appeals of New York)
Somek A (2014) The cosmopolitan constitution. Oxford University Press
Stock G (2005) Germinal choice technology and the human future. Reprod BioMed Online 10:27
Stockholm Resilience Centre ‘Adaptive Governance’ (6 December 2010). http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-streames/stewardship/adaptive-governance-.html
Strawson G (11 September 2014) Sapiens: a brief history of humankind by Yuval Noah Harari – review. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/sep/11/sapiens-brief-history-humankind-yuval-noah-harari-review
Suter SM (2002) The routinization of prenatal testing. Am J Law Med 28:233
Sweet AS, Mathews J (2008) Proportionality balancing and global constitutionalism. Columbia J Transntl Law 72:47
Taranto S (22 January 2018) How abortion became the single most important litmus test in American politics. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/01/22/how-abortion-became-the-single-most-important-litmus-test-in-american-politics/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b4015648272b
ten Have HAMJ, Jean MS (2009) The UNESCO universal declaration on bioethics and human rights: background, principles and application. UNESCO Publishing
The Guardian (4 March 2011) Profiles of the future by Arthur C Clarke – review. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2011/mar/04/profiles-future-arthur-clarke-review
Trebilcock MJ, Iacobucci EM (2009) Designing competition law institutions: values, structure, and mandate. Loyola Univ Chicago Law J 41:455
Uitz R (2015) Can you tell when an illiberal democracy is in the making? An appeal to comparative constitutional scholarship from hungary. Int J Const Law 13:279
UNESCO (11 November 1997) Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13177&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
UNESCO (2006) The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001461/146180E.pdf
United States v. Carolene Products Co. 304 U.S. 144 (1938) (Justia Law) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/304/144/case.html
van Gossum O, Arts B, Verheyen K (2010) From “smart regulation” to “regulatory arrangements”. Policy Sci 43:245–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-101-9108-0
van Klink B (2016) Symbolic legislation: an essentially political concept. In: van Klink B, van Beers B, Poort L (eds) Symbolic legislation theory and developments in biolaw, vol 4. Springer
World Medical Association (19 October 2013) WMA Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lau, P.L. (2019). The Regulatory Framework in Biomedical Technologies. In: Comparative Legal Frameworks for Pre-Implantation Embryonic Genetic Interventions. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22308-3_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22308-3_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-22307-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-22308-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)