header-logo header-logo

A consistent approach

05 October 2012 / Barbara Hewson
Issue: 7532 / Categories: Features , Professional negligence , Mental health
printer mail-detail

Barbara Hewson highlights some recent trends in reproductive rights

On 28 August 2012, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) published an interesting decision on Italy’s law on artificial insemination. The case, Costa v Italy (App No 54270/10), is striking: first, because it is a unanimous ruling in a sensitive area and, second, because of its trenchant distinction between the status of a “child” and an “embryo”.

The applicants are a couple who are healthy carriers of cystic fibrosis. They first discovered their status, after they had a daughter in 2006, who was diagnosed with the disease. Understandably, the couple were anxious to avoid having further children similarly afflicted. When Ms Costa became pregnant again in 2012, she underwent antenatal screening and the baby was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis. The couple decided to terminate that pregnancy. They then sought to have a baby by “in vitro fertilisation” (IVF), but wanted to have the embryo genetically screened prior to implantation. This is called “pre-implantation diagnosis” (PID).

Interference

Italian law prohibits PID,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll