The article is devoted to a comparative legal study of the legalization of euthanasia in European countries and Ukraine. The authors have investigated the changes in the ECHR positions in the consideration of cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide. We concluded that the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights include an attempt to guarantee a balance in the right to choose the moment of death and the rights that are protected by 2 and 8 of the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The ECHR practice has been found to also influence the legalization of euthanasia in European states. Analysis of the laws of several European states in the context of legalizing the institution of euthanasia allowed us to group them as follows: European states that have legalized euthanasia (Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and Spain); European states that have legalized only passive euthanasia (Great Britain, Ireland, Latvia, Norway, Slovak Republic, Finland, Sweden, and Hungary); and European states that prohibit any kind of euthanasia (France, Poland, Romania, etc.).
The aim: To find out the peculiarities of citizens’ implementation of their reproductive rights, while combining the basic principles of medicine and law.
Materials and methods: Formal-logical methods of analysis and synthesis allowed to reveal the content of the concepts that make up the subject of research, to classify them, as well as to formulate intermediate and general conclusions. The systematic method allowed to study the role and significance of human reproductive right among other somatic human rights and freedoms. Using the historical method, the doctrinal basis of the study was analyzed, and the main stages of the formation of human right to transplantation were identified. The application of the above-mentioned methods necessitates the inclusion of an activity method in the research methodology. This method, becoming a logical continuation of the integral structural-functional method, involves the study of relevant reproductive rights through the development of medical technologies.
Conclusions: The modern development of biotechnology has caused a number of serious threats to the possibility of realizing the human right to life. The modern understanding of the content of the right to life concerns a number of bioethical aspects, primarily related to the development of scientific and technological progress in both biology and medicine. The content of the human right to life in the context of the achievements of reproductive rights is significantly expanding, which leads to a new concept of it, not only as a fundamental human right, but also as a set of rights that relate to human life, taking into account the principles of bioethics. Therefore, the need to compare the goal and the means in biological and medical manipulations with human life, their consideration of the ethical and moral aspect is extremely important for the further development of the entire legal array regarding biomedicine.
Стаття ставить метою дослідження змісту "прав добробуту" в США в контексті правових позицій Верховного Суду США. Зроблено аналіз ключових рішень Верховного Суду щодо захисту таких прав. Автори дійшли висновку, що правові позиції Верховного Суду США пройшли еволюцію в розумінні "прав добробуту": від їх повного заперечення до оцінки в координатах принципу верховенства права Ключові слова: США, Верховний суд, права добробуту, соціальні права, верховенство права
Вплив Римського права на правову культуру в Польщі . . . 133 Василь Лемак, доктор юридичних наук, професор, член-кореспондент Національної академії правових наук України, суддя Конституційного Суду України
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.