Department of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopedic Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 336, 00161 Rome, Italy.
Malzoni Clinical Scientific Institute, Via Carmelo Errico 2, 83100 Avellino, Italy.
Hum Reprod Update. 2017 May 1;23(3):338-357. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmx002.
Prenatal diagnosis based on different technologies is increasingly used in developed countries and has become a common strategy in obstetric practice. The tests are crucial in enabling mothers to make informed decisions about the possibility of terminating pregnancy. They have generated numerous bioethical and legal controversies in the field of 'wrongful life' claims (action brought by or on behalf of a child against the mother or other people, claiming that he or she has to endure a not-worth-living existence) and 'wrongful birth' claims (action brought by the mother or parents against the physician for being burdened with an unwanted, often disabled child, which could have been avoided).
The possibility which exists nowadays to intervene actively by programming and deciding the phases linked to procreation and birth has raised several questions worldwide. The mother's right to self-determination could be an end but whether or not this right is absolute is debatable. Freedom could, with time, act as a barrier that obstructs intrusion into other people's lives and their personal choices. Therapeutic choices may be manageable in a liberal sense, and the sanctity of life can be inflected in a secular sense. These sensitive issues and the various points of view to be considered have motivated this review.
Literature searches were conducted on relevant demographic, social science and medical science databases (SocINDEX, Econlit, PopLine, Medline, Embase and Current Contents) and via other sources. Searches focused on subjects related to bioethical and legal controversies in the field of preimplantation and prenatal diagnosis, wrongful birth and wrongful life. A review of the international state of law was carried out, focusing attention on the peculiar issue of wrongful life and investigating the different jurisdictional solutions of wrongful life claims in a comparative survey.
Courts around the world are generally reluctant to acknowledge wrongful life claims due to their ethical and legal implications, such as existence as an injury, the right not to be born, the nature of the harm suffered and non-existence as an alternative to a disabled life. Most countries have rejected such actions while at the same time approving those for wrongful birth. Some countries, such as France with a law passed in March 2002, have definitively excluded Wrongful Life action. Only in the Netherlands and in three states of the USA (California, Washington and New Jersey) Wrongful Life actions are allowed. In other countries, such as Belgium, legislation is unclear because, despite a first decision of the Court allowing Wrongful Life action, the case is still in progress. There is a complete lack of case law regarding wrongful conception, wrongful birth and wrongful life in a few countries, such as Estonia.
The themes of 'wrongful birth' and 'wrongful life' are charged with perplexing ethical dilemmas and raise delicate legal questions. These have met, in various countries and on certain occasions, with different solutions and have triggered ethical and juridical debate. The damage case scenarios result from a lack of information or diagnosis prior to the birth, which deprives the mother of the chance to terminate the pregnancy.
基于不同技术的产前诊断在发达国家越来越多地被使用,并已成为产科实践中的一种常见策略。这些测试在使母亲能够就终止妊娠的可能性做出明智的决定方面至关重要。它们在“错误生命”主张(由孩子或代表孩子对母亲或其他人提起的诉讼,声称他或她必须忍受不值得过的生活)和“错误出生”主张(由母亲或父母对医生提起的诉讼,因为他们被赋予了一个不想要的、通常是残疾的孩子,而这个孩子本可以避免)领域引发了许多生物伦理和法律争议。
如今,通过编程和决定与生育和出生相关的阶段来积极干预的可能性在全球范围内引发了诸多问题。母亲的自决权可能是一个终点,但这个权利是否绝对是有争议的。随着时间的推移,自由可能会成为阻碍侵犯他人生活和个人选择的障碍。治疗选择在自由意义上可能是可以管理的,生命的神圣性可以在世俗意义上受到影响。这些敏感问题和各种需要考虑的观点促使我们进行了这次审查。
在相关的人口统计学、社会科学和医学科学数据库(SocINDEX、Econlit、PopLine、Medline、Embase 和 Current Contents)以及其他来源上进行了文献检索。搜索重点是与植入前和产前诊断、错误出生和错误生命领域的生物伦理和法律争议相关的主题。对国际法律状况进行了审查,重点关注错误生命的特殊问题,并在比较调查中研究了错误生命主张的不同司法解决方案。
世界各地的法院普遍不愿意承认错误生命主张,因为它们涉及到伦理和法律问题,例如作为一种伤害的存在、不出生的权利、所遭受的伤害的性质以及作为残疾生活的替代方案的不存在。大多数国家都拒绝了此类诉讼,同时批准了针对错误出生的诉讼。一些国家,如 2002 年 3 月通过法律的法国,已经明确排除了错误生命诉讼。只有在荷兰和美国的三个州(加利福尼亚州、华盛顿州和新泽西州)才允许错误生命诉讼。在其他一些国家,如比利时,立法不明确,因为尽管法院做出了第一个允许错误生命诉讼的决定,但此案仍在审理中。在少数几个国家,如爱沙尼亚,几乎没有关于错误受孕、错误出生和错误生命的案例法。
“错误出生”和“错误生命”的主题充满了令人困惑的伦理困境,并引发了微妙的法律问题。在不同的国家和某些情况下,这些问题已经得到了不同的解决,并引发了伦理和法律辩论。损害案件的情况是由于在分娩前缺乏信息或诊断,这剥夺了母亲终止妊娠的机会。