Approach to Biolaw as an Autonomous Juridical Discipline

  • Carlos María Romeo CasabonaEmail author
  • Sergio Romeo Malanda
Part of the International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine book series (LIME, volume 78)


The approach of law to science and technology’s conflicts is not an easy task. Its answers to the problem have often been to assume the emerging social relations, to regulate normatively or to recognize judicially those relations as well as to introduce new axiological principles through their own normative (i.e., legal or judicial, in terms of the structure of the various legal systems). This phenomenon has been more exceptional and usually comes from a bioethical reflection. Much has been written about the concept of bioethics and its incardination within applied ethics. However, very little progress has been made in shaping biolaw as a legal discipline. At most, it has been assumed as a mere terminological update of the classic term “medical law” or “health law”, even without distinguishing well both concepts from each other. However, biolaw is more than that, and so it must be understood. It does not correspond solely and exclusively to the set of norms dealing with issues related to the life sciences, but it goes further. Thus, this chapter is a proposal for the foundation of biolaw as an autonomous juridical discipline.


  1. Aparisi, A. (2007). Bioética, bioderecho y biojurídica (Reflexiones desde la filosofía del derecho). Anuario de Filosofía del Derecho, 24, 63–84.Google Scholar
  2. Castellano, M. (1998). La Medicina Legal. Concepto y organización. In C. Romeo Casabona (Coord.). Derecho biomédico y bioética (pp. 59–85). Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
  3. De Miguel, Iñigo. (2001). La metodología interdisciplinar en el derecho relativo a la Ciencia y a la Tecnología. In C. Romeo casabona (Ed.). Los nuevos horizontes de la investigación genética (pp. 97–129). Bilbao-Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
  4. Figueroa, G. (2011). Bioderecho. In C. Romeo Casabona (Dir.). Enciclopedia de Bioderecho y Bioética, Tomo 1 (pp. 146–154). Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
  5. González, L. (2007). Bioética y Bioderecho: un diálogo necesario. Bioética & Debat, 50, 10–16.Google Scholar
  6. Gracia, D. (1997). Ética de la sexualidad. In J. Gafo & J.R. Amor (Eds.), Matrimonio y deficiencia mental (pp. 93–117). Madrid: Universidad Pontificia Comillas.Google Scholar
  7. Kemp, P. (2007). La mundialización de la ética. México D.F.: Fontamara.Google Scholar
  8. Mateo, M. (1987). Bioética y Derecho. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
  9. Nielsen, L. (1997). From bioethics to Biolaw: “A blessing or infection?”. In M. Palacios (Ed.), I Congreso Mundial de Bioética (pp. 55–64). Gijón: Sociedad Internacional de Bioética.Google Scholar
  10. Roy, W., et al. (1995) La Bioéthique. Ses fondements et ses controverses (p. 75). Éd. du Renouveau Pédagogique Inc., Saint Laurént.Google Scholar
  11. Salcedo, J. R. (2014). La ciencia del Bioderecho. Revista, 1; 1–7.Google Scholar
  12. Simón, P. (2011). Bioética e instituciones públicas en España: una visión personal. In J. De la Torre (Ed.), Pasado, presente y futuro de la bioética española (pp. 151–159). Madrid: Universidad Pontificia Comilla.Google Scholar
  13. Terribas, N. (1996). La razón de ser del “Bioderecho”. Bioética & Debat, 6, 11.Google Scholar
  14. Valdés, E. (2013). Bioderecho, Genética y derechos humanos. Análisis de los alcances jurídicos del Bioderecho europeo y su posible aplicación en Estados Unidos como fuente de derechos humanos de cuarta generación. Universitas Revista de Filosofía, Derecho y Política, 17, 139–163.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos María Romeo Casabona
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sergio Romeo Malanda
    • 2
  1. 1.University of the Basque CountryBilbaoSpain
  2. 2.University of Las Palmas de Gran CanariaLas PalmasSpain

Personalised recommendations