Year: 2022
Author: Röttger, Sara
Zeitschrift für Lebensrecht, Vol. 31 (2022), Iss. 3 : pp. 277–292
Abstract
Transgenic animals: prohibition of creating chimera and hybrids in the Embryo Protection Act in the change of time
The german Embryo Protection Act was just changed once in its thirty years history. In order to be brought up to date with genetics and reproductive medicine, it was updated, as the widening gap between medical progress and the legal framework would otherwise result in an intolerable lack of legal clarity and legal security. Now, the blastocyst complementation, the use of human induced pluripotent stem cells, in the context of the xenotransplantation is again questioning the topicality of the prohibition of creating chimeras and hybrids but also the act itself. Especially, there is the question about the protectie purpose of § 7 ESchG, since it is unclear what should be covered by the mentioned protection of human dignity. As a criminal law, the Embryo Protection Act is subject to the rigid limitations of its own wording, so that an analogy for unnamed individual cases is not possible. This makes it difficult for the legislator to set preventive regulations. Due to the rapid medical developments, the Embryo Protection Act should possibly be redesigned from scratch in order to react more flexibly.
You do not have full access to this article.
Already a Subscriber? Sign in as an individual or via your institution
Journal Article Details
Publisher Name: Global Science Press
Language: German
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3790/zfl.31.3.277
Zeitschrift für Lebensrecht, Vol. 31 (2022), Iss. 3 : pp. 277–292
Published online: 2022-07
AMS Subject Headings: Duncker & Humblot
Copyright: COPYRIGHT: © Global Science Press
Pages: 16
Keywords: Embryonenschutzgesetz Chimäre Hybride Mensch-Tier-Mischwesen induzierte pluripotente Stammzellen Xenotransplantation Blastozysten-Komplementierung
Author Details
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sara Röttger: Transgene Tiere: Chimären- und Hybridbildungsverbot des Embryonenschutzgesetzes im Wandel der Zeit | 277 | ||
| I. Einleitung | 277 | ||
| II. Entwicklung in der Biologie | 278 | ||
| 1. Begriffe | 278 | ||
| 2. Anwendungsbereich: Xenotransplantation | 279 | ||
| III. Vereinbarkeit der Erzeugung von Mischwesen mit dem Recht | 280 | ||
| 1. Strafbarkeit des Verfahrens gemäß ESchG | 281 | ||
| a) Chimären | 281 | ||
| b) Hybride | 281 | ||
| c) Klonbildungsverbot | 282 | ||
| d) Künstliche Veränderung menschlicher Keimbahnzellen | 282 | ||
| e) Missbräuchliche Nutzung von Embryonen | 283 | ||
| f) Zwischenergebnis | 283 | ||
| 2. Planwidrige Regelungslücke des ESchG? | 283 | ||
| a) Gametenfusion | 283 | ||
| b) Differenzierungsfähiger Embryo | 284 | ||
| c) Dolly-Verfahren | 285 | ||
| 3. Grundrechtliche Einordnung | 277 | ||
| IV. Ethische Bewertung | 277 | ||
| V. Regelungsvorschlag | 277 | ||
| 1. ESchG in seiner aktuellen Form anpassen | 277 | ||
| 2. Reform des ESchG | 277 | ||
| VI. Ergebnis | 277 | ||
| Abstract | 277 | ||
| Transgenic animals: prohibition of creating chimera and hybrids in the Embryo Protection Act in the change of time | 277 | ||
| Schlagworte | 277 |