The pluralism problem in cross-border reproductive care

Human Reproduction

Volumn 25, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 2939-2943

  Storrow, R F ^a  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

cross border reproductive care; democracy; law; pluralism; proportionality

Indexed keywords

HUMAN; INFERTILITY; LEGAL ASPECT; MORALITY; NOTE; POLITICS; REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH;

EID: 78649520642     PISSN: 02681161     EISSN: 14602350     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deq270     Document Type: Note

References (24)

1. Arai-Takahashi Y. The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of Proportionality in the Jurisprudence of the ECHR. Antwerp: Intersentia, 2002.
2. Benagiano G, Gianaroli L. The Italian constitutional court modifies Italian legislation on assisted reproduction technology. Reprod Biomed Online 2010;20:398-402.
3. Cohen J. Reflections on Habermas on democracy. Ratio Juris 1999; 12:385-416.
4. Crosignani PG. Looking to Europe: something's changed in Italy. Hum Fertil 2005;8:71.
5. Delmonico FL. The development of the Declaration of Istanbul on organ trafficking and transplant tourism. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2008; 23:3381-3382.
6. Elstub S. A double-edged sword: the increasing diversity of deliberative democracy. Contemporary Politics 2006;12:301-319.
7. ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law. Cross-border reproductive care. Hum Reprod 2008;23:2182-2184.
8. Evans v. United Kingdom, no. 6339/05, ECHR 2007.
9. Galston W. Expressive liberty, moral pluralism, political pluralism: three sources of liberal theory. Wm Mary Law Rev 1999;40:869-907.
10. Galston W. The Practice of Liberal Pluralism. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
11. Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. Rethinking 'reproductive rourism' as 'reproductive exile'. Fertil Steril 2009;92:904-906.
12. Matorras R. Reproductive exile versus reproductive tourism. Hum Reprod 2005;20:3571.
13. McKelvey A, David AL, Shenfield F, Jauniaux ER. The impact of cross-border reproductive care or 'fertility tourism' on NHS maternity services. BCOG 2009;116:1520-1523.
14. Merlet F, Sénémaud B. Prise en charge du don d'ovocytes: réglementation du don, la face caché du tourisme procréatif. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2010; 38:36-44.
15. Nielsen L. Legal consensus and divergence in Europe in the area of assisted conception-room for harmonisation? In: Evans D (ed). Creating the Child. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1996, 305-324.
16. Pennings G. Reproductive tourism as moral pluralism in motion. J Med Ethics 2002;28:337-341.
17. Pennings G. Legal harmonization and reproductive tourism in Europe. Hum Reprod 2004;19:2689-2694.
18. Pennings G. Reproductive exile versus reproductive tourism. Hum Reprod 2005;20:3571-3572.
19. Pennings G. International parenthood via procreative tourism. In: Shenfield F, Sureau C (eds). Contemporary Ethical Dilemmas in Assisted Reproduction. Abingdon, Oxon: Informa Health Care, 2006,43-56.
20. Ratner L. Constitutions, majoritarianism, and judicial review: the function of a bill of rights in Israel and the United States. Am J Comp Law 1978; 26:373-396.
21. Robertson JA. Protecting embryos and burdening women: assisted reproduction in Italy. Hum Reprod 2004;19:1693-1696.
22. S.H. and Others v. Austria, no. 57813/00, ECHR 2010.
23. Shenfield F, de Mouzon J, Pennings G, Ferraretti A, Anderson A, de Wert G, Goossens V. Cross-border reproductive care in six European countries. Hum Reprod 2010;25:1361-1368.
24. Smith E, Behrmann J, Martin C, Williams-Jones B. Reproductive tourism in Argentina: clinic accreditation and its implications for consumers, health professionals and policy makers. Dev World Bioeth 2010; 10:59-69.