Abstract
There is a high degree of legal diversity within Europe concerning medically assisted reproduction. This is in direct opposition to the project of harmonization of the European institutions. This paper takes a closer look at the different national interpretations of the European Convention on Human Rights with regard to gamete donation. In the case of S.H. and Others v. Austria, the European Court of Human Rights originally condemned the prohibitions on egg donation and sperm donation for the purpose of IVF. The court judged the law to be incoherent and disproportionate. This decision was recently reversed on appeal based on the margin of appreciation doctrine. This paper critically reviews the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and analyses what this case means for the future of legislation on medically assisted reproduction in Europe. It is concluded that legal diversity and cross-border reproductive care will persist and that the court failed to protect European patients from arbitrary interference with their right to procreation.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.