Some Statements Concerning the "Right to be Born"

Abstract

The paper is devoted to the topical issues related to the implementation of the right of a proto-human (nasciturus, an unborn child) to be born and to the assumptions about the legitimate interests of general and special types consolidated in the legislation of a number of countries (constitutional law, civil law, criminal law). The Russian law protects such interests, at least to some extent, in indirect and direct forms. In the indirect form such interests are protected through the benefits and allowances for pregnant women provided under medical, labor, social security, and family legislation. Motherhood is encouraged through the instruments of financial, tax, housing law, and it is given special protection by criminal and penal legislation. In the direct form interests under consideration are protected through the establishment of opportunities under civil law for inheritance and compensation for the loss of a breadwinner. The author explains the difference between approaches to the problem of a legal status and legal capacity of the nisciturus under foreign and Russian laws. The paper provides for the reflections concerning the right to natural biological origin discussed in the doctrine and adjustment of its elements. Also, the paper examines special rights that, due to their purpose and content, are opposed to the right to be born, namely: the right to terminate pregnancy, the right to sterilization. The author emphasizes that not only the right to be born is limited by the lawmaker for objective and subjective reasons. Separate from this complex of interactions, although in connection with the act of the birth, the author analyzes the circumstances caused by the problem of the birth of a dead child. The author elucidates unsettled regulatory and enforcement decisions associated with the protection of the interests of the parents of such a child. The author focuses on inadmissibility of formal legal application of relevant legislation, on the need for its broad interpretation in favor of humanitarian, fair, ethically balanced enforcement of the right of the individual to private and family life.