One Statute to the Human Embryo

One Statute to the Human Embryo

The great speculation about the Statute of the human embryo is multidisciplinary, involving the lack of consensus about its terminologies, morals, philosophical beliefs, ethical, medical and legal questions, and others. New issues arise as the subject is extensively discussed, i.e. :
1- The considerations that the "in vitro" embryo and the "in uterus" embryo have different statuses dependent on its connection with a parental project;
2- There are global legislative tendencies about questions linked to the embryo (and this book shows the existence of a implied global statute of the human embryo through legislation of many coutries, showing its position about questions like abortion, stem cells research, cloning, pre-implantation genectic diagnosis, eugenic interventions, sex seletion, egg donation, embryo market, etc.);
3- The countries which have legislation about the subject are often inconsistent in relation to other rules already published- where an embryo becomes sacred while a fetus is disregarded. It is possible to overcome the political language barries and adopt a common language within this issue. Ethical, medical, legal, and philosophical questions will be discussed in the text.

The embryo's moral's Statute is utupian, because it is almost impossible for morally divergent individuals to agree about the morality of an embryo. Meanwhile, we believe that the elaboration of a common Legal Statute to regulate protection levels and intervention limits over human embryos to be possible.

The adoption of a common language between parts involved in the debate is a necessity. the search for legislative global tendencies (related to questions about the human embryo) will have a significant impact combining the divergent perspectives between countries with dissimilar moral values. Legislative consistency is another important point: each country needs to be consistent with the publication of its own laws.

Where religious and layman bioethics are concerned, we believe in the dialogue between divergent individuals to be possible because the bioethical principles pursued are the same: the search for rithteousness and not ill will, justice and respect of autonomy. Dialogue, tolerance and respect are key words in the construction of a bridge between the parts.