On May 6th 2014, the European Court of Human Rights added yet a new element to the judicial history of stem cells as it ruled in Durisotto v. Italy [appeal n. 62804/13]. The ruling rejected a patient claim to access an unproven cell therapy-an outcome that is certainly to be welcomed. However, this ruling is a missed occasion to clarify and reaffirm some important legal distinctions that could have greatly benefited the whole field of regenerative medicine. We claim that the ethical and political assumptions that sustain the regulation of expanded access programs to new therapies should be carefully scrutinized, with particular attention to the justifications for the risks connected to unconventional therapies. A clear legal definition of what counts as compassionate cure as distinct from unregulated and untested therapies cannot be provided unless those points are previously addressed.
机构:
European Court Human Rights, Strasbourg, France
Tirana Univ, Law Fac, EU Law, Publ Int Law, Tirana, Albania
Tirana Univ, Law Fac, ECHR Law, Tirana, Albania
Albanian Sch Magistrates, Tirana, Albania
Venice Commiss Democracy Law, Venice, ItalyEuropean Court Human Rights, Strasbourg, France
Bianku, Ledi
Kempees, Peter
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Registry European Court Human Rights, Strasbourg, FranceEuropean Court Human Rights, Strasbourg, France
Kempees, Peter
LEGITIMACY OF UNSEEN ACTORS IN INTERNATIONAL ADJUDICATION,
2019,
: 108
-
120