Science, Art and Religion

Register      Login

VOLUME 1 , ISSUE 2-4 ( April-December, 2022 ) > List of Articles


The Unborn and Its Rights

Amila Ferhatović, Silvije Degen

Keywords : Fetal rights, Scientific and legal controversies, Unborn baby

Citation Information : Ferhatović A, Degen S. The Unborn and Its Rights. 2022; 1 (2-4):237-242.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-11005-0028

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 20-03-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


One of the most controversial topics in modern bioethics, science, and philosophy is the beginning of individual human life and the legal rights of fetus. In the seemingly endless debate, strongly stimulated by recent technologic advances in human reproduction, a synthesis between scientific data and hypothesis, philosophical thought, and issues of humanities has become a necessity to deal with ethical, juridical, and social problems. Modern bioethics and science are strongly concerned for the respect of human life at both ends of its existence (birth and death), but other sciences (e.g., philosophy, technology, psychology, sociology, law, and politics) consider the beginning of human life according to different points of view. However, bioethical topics like this one cannot be treated from only one perspective (e.g., biological, philosophical, or religious) because conclusions might be not good enough or reductive. This reality should be regarded in all its richness: an embryo gives a biologist and a geneticist substance for consideration, but because we are talking about the beginning of human life, it requires philosophical–anthropological consideration and confrontation with theology; in its protection, we have to include ethics and law. In experiencing and investigating social behavior, other disciplines, such as the history of medicine and sociology, have to be included.

  1. Kurjak A, Zergollern-Čupak L. Pravo na život i pravo na smrt. Zagreb: Jumena; 1982.
  2. Zergollern-Čupak L, Kurjak A. Prenatalna dijagnostika. Zagreb: Jumena; 1984.
  3. Zergollern-Čupak L. Uvod u medicinsku genetiku s kliničkom citogenetikom. Zagreb: Liber; 1977.
  4. Šeparović Z. Granica rizika. Zagreb: Zrinski; 1985.
  5. Uremović V. Medicinsko-pravni odnos prema neželjenoj trudnoći u našem kraju u prošlosti i danas. Rijeka: Medicinski fakultet; 1974 (Habilitacioni rad).
  6. Degen S, Kurjak A. Medico-legal aspects of antenatally detected malformed fetuses. Perinat Med 1982;10(Suppl 2):81. DOI: 10.1515/jpme.1982.10.s2.81
  7. Kurjak A, Degen S. Legal problems and the ultrasonically detected malformed fetus. Ultrasound Med Biol 1983;Suppl 2:33–36. Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. Brighton, England, July 1982 and Fifth World Congress of Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology.
  8. Breyer B, Banić I. Intrauterino ubistvo s pravnog i medicinskog aspekta. Zbornik radova VI Kongresa gin. Opst Jug 1968;2:311.
  9. Abdulmajid B. The unborn human, ethico-legal significance and protection. In: Kurjak A, Chervenak FA. Controversies on the Beginning of Human Life. Jaypee Brothers; 2008.
  10. Kurjak A, Chervenak FA. Controversies on the Beginning of Human Life. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers; 2008. Endnotes (quoted from reference 9).
  11. (1979) 1Q.B. 270.
  12. Section 1 (1).
  13. Section 1 (2).
  14. Supra
  15. For example, the Jehovah Witnesses sect.
  16. 247, Ga. 86, 274 S.E. 2d 457.
  17. 573 A. 2d 1235.
  18. III. App. 3d 392, 198 III. Dec. 267, 632 N.E. 2nd 326.
  19. “The Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms” adopted under the auspices of the Council of Europe in 1950.
  20. Case of Vo v. France [2004], ECHR, Application No. 53924100.
  21. Case of Grosmagnin from Mets [1998].
  22. Case of Potonet from Versaille.
  23. X v. the United Kingdom, no. 8416179, European Commission of Human Rights Decision of 13 May 1980, Decisions and Reports 19, p. 244.
  24. Davies M. Law Medical. 2nd ed. p. 16.
  25. The Impact of the Human Rights Act on Medical Decision Making. Available from:
  26. [2001] N.L.Y. 1572.
  27. The Independent, 9 April 2003.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.