8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      El Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos y la relevancia del vínculo genético: una revisión de la jurisprudencia sobre gestación por sustitución transfronteriza Translated title: El Tribunal Europeu de Drets Humans i la rellevància del vincle genètic: una revisió de la jurisprudència sobre gestació per substitució transfronterera Translated title: The European Court of Human Rights and the relevance of genetic linkage: a review of the jurisprudence on cross-border surrogacy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Resumen En ausencia de instrumentos internacionales que establezcan pautas comunes sobre los acuerdos de gestación por sustitución transfronteriza, los ordenamientos que los prohíben o los consideran nulos han tenido que enfrentarse a la cuestión de sus efectos, lo que ya ha dado lugar a varios pronunciamientos del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. A partir del precedente Mennesson c. Francia (2014), el trabajo analiza las diferentes aproximaciones al fenómeno que han sido objeto de escrutinio por parte del TEDH. El trabajo presta una atención especial, por su mayor frecuencia, a los casos que tienen origen en la negativa de un estado a reconocer la filiación resultante de un acuerdo de gestación por sustitución celebrado fuera de sus fronteras y, en particular, al peso otorgado a la exigencia de vínculo genético entre el menor y al menos un progenitor de intención. Los más recientes Valdís Fjölnisdóttir y otros c. Islandia (2021) y A.M. c. Noruega (2022) evidencian que limitar el reconocimiento de efectos de estos acuerdos a los casos en que existe dicho vínculo no es coherente con el interés superior de los menores que resultan de los mismos, en especial cuando su adopción ya no es posible.

          Translated abstract

          Resum A manca d'instruments internacionals que estableixin pautes comunes sobre els acords de gestació per substitució transfronterera, els ordenaments que els prohibeixen o els consideren nuls s'han hagut d'enfrontar a la qüestió dels seus efectes, el que ja ha donat lloc a diversos pronunciaments per part del Tribunal Europeu de Drets Humans. A partir del precedent Mennesson c. França (2014), el treball analitza les diferents aproximacions al fenomen que han estat objecte d'escrutini per part del TEDH. El treball posa una atenció especial, atesa la seva major freqüència, en els casos que s'originen en la negativa d'un estat a reconèixer la filiació resultant d'un acord de gestació per substitució celebrat fora de les seves fronteres i, en particular, en el pes atorgat a l'exigència de vincle genètic entre el menor i com a mínim un progenitor d'intenció. Els més recents Valdís Fjölnisdóttir i altres c. Islàndia (2021) i A.M. c. Noruega (2022) evidencien que limitar el reconeixement d'efectes d'aquests acords als casos d'existència del mencionat vincle no és coherent amb l'interès superior dels menors que en resulten, en especial quan la seva adopció ja no és possible.

          Translated abstract

          Abstract In the absence of international instruments establishing common guidelines for cross-border surrogacy agreements, jurisdictions that prohibit them or consider them null and void have been confronted with the question of their effects, which has already led to several rulings by the European Court of Human Rights. Based on the leading case Mennesson v. France (2014), this paper analyses the different approaches to the phenomenon which have been scrutinized by the ECtHR. Due to their greater frequency, the paper pays special attention to cases arising from a state's refusal to recognize parenthood resulting from a surrogacy arrangement concluded outside its borders and, in particular, to the weight given to the requirement of a genetic link between the child and at least one intended parent. The more recent Valdís Fjölnisdóttir and other v. Iceland (2021) and A.M. v. Norway (2022) make it clear that limiting the recognition of the effects of these arrangements to cases where such a link exist is not consistent with the best interests of the resulting children, especially when adoption is no longer possible.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cross border reproductive care in six European countries.

          The quantity and the reasons for seeking cross border reproductive care are unknown. The present article provides a picture of this activity in six selected European countries receiving patients. Data were collected from 46 ART centres, participating voluntarily in six European countries receiving cross border patients. All treated patients treated in these centres during one calendar month filled out an individual questionnaire containing their major socio-demographic characteristics, the treatment sought and their reasons for seeking treatment outside their country of residence. In total, 1230 forms were obtained from the six countries: 29.7% from Belgium, 20.5% from Czech Republic, 12.5% from Denmark, 5.3% from Slovenia, 15.7% from Spain and 16.3% from Switzerland. Patients originated from 49 different countries. Among the cross border patients participating, almost two-thirds came from four countries: Italy (31.8%), Germany (14.4%), The Netherlands (12.1%) and France (8.7%). The mean age of the participants was 37.3 years for all countries (range 21-51 years), 69.9% were married and 90% were heterosexual. Their reasons for crossing international borders for treatment varied by countries of origin: legal reasons were predominant for patients travelling from Italy (70.6%), Germany (80.2%), France (64.5%), Norway (71.6%) and Sweden (56.6%). Better access to treatment than in country of origin was more often noted for UK patients (34.0%) than for other nationalities. Quality was an important factor for patients from most countries. The cross border phenomenon is now well entrenched. The data show that many patients travel to evade restrictive legislation in their own country, and that support from their home health providers is variable. There may be a need for professional societies to establish standards for cross border reproductive care.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Documento sobre gestación por sustitución

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              Informe del Comité de Bioética de España sobre el derecho de los hijos nacidos de las técnicas de reproducción humana asistida a conocer sus orígenes biológicos

              (2020)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                bioetica
                Revista de Bioética y Derecho
                Rev. Bioética y Derecho
                Observatori de Bioètica i Dret - Cátedra UNESCO de Bioética (Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain )
                1886-5887
                2022
                : 56
                : 29-54
                Affiliations
                [1] Cataluña orgnameUniversitat Pompeu Fabra Spain
                Article
                S1886-58872022000300029 S1886-5887(22)00005600029
                10.1344/rbd2022.56.40620
                9641e40b-f462-452a-8270-141c522be9ef

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 30 September 2022
                : 15 September 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 33, Pages: 26
                Product

                SciELO Spain

                Categories
                Dossier sobre gestación por sustitución

                progenitor/s d'intenció,allunyament del menor,retorn a l'Estat d'origen,filiació,Gestació per substitució transfronterera,interés superior del menor,vida privada y familiar,vínculo genético,progenitor/es de intención,alejamiento del menor,retorno al Estado de origen,filiación,Gestación por sustitución transfronteriza,best interests of the child,private and family life,genetic link,intentional parent/s,child removal,return to the country of origin,parenthood,Cross-border surrogacy,interès superior del menor,vida privada i familiar,vincle genètic

                Comments

                Comment on this article