• Title/Summary/Keyword: Bioethics and Biosafety Act

Search Result 3, Processing Time 0.018 seconds

Legislation on Genetic Diagnosis: Comparison of South Korea and Germany - With Focus on the Application and Communication Structure -

  • Kim, Na-Kyoung
    • Development and Reproduction
    • /
    • v.19 no.2
    • /
    • pp.111-118
    • /
    • 2015
  • This article explores the questions regarding PND and PID, especially the concrete legal conditions for the justification of PND and PID. As such, the German law stipulating PND and PID in a very concrete and detailed manner is introduced and explained in comparison with the corresponding South Korean law. The South Korean Bioethics and Biosafety Act (BBA) stipulates various types of gene testing and does not demonstrate a delicate sense of each type of gene testing. In contrast to the South Korean regulation, in Germany, there exist specific regulations for genetic counseling. Especially in the case of PND, GEKO stipulates the process of genetic counseling very concretely, based on GenDG. In the case of PND and PID, it is important that the people concerned understand the meaning of testing in various angles, and restructuralize it by combining it with their own values as the diagnosis is directly combined with pregnancy/abortion, which influences the whole life of a woman (and her partner). In this context, the South Korean BBA needs to be amended as soon as possible. The sections on informed consent also need to be amended to make them more concrete. Furthermore, guidelines for concretizing the regulation of BBA need to be continuously formulated and developed.

Human Embryo Research and Tort Liability (배아연구와 불법행위책임)

  • Seo, Jong-Hee
    • The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
    • /
    • v.12 no.1
    • /
    • pp.227-255
    • /
    • 2011
  • Recently, many nations said "yes" to human embryonic stem cell research, signing an executive order to permit funding for the research in the mame of achieving health and life of humankind. Human Embryo Research is permitted by our Bioethics & Biosafety Act. But, illegal research cannot be divorced from civil liability since it requires the destruction of eggs of fertilized eggs and personal rights of embryo-creator. After all, though we allow to do research embryo, we should control the capacity of abuse of embryo research for embryo-creator. If research violate the law(Bioethics & Biosafety Act or Civil Law, etc), it comes to a delict by pecuniary loss and non-pecuniary loss. When it comes to pecuniary loss, Human Embryo is not body but special property. Supreme Court maintained a stance that mental suffering is generally deemed as compensable for damages for the loss of property where a person's property right is invaded by a tort or non-performance of obligation. Thus, where mental suffering occurs, which cannot be compensated by recovery of property losses, the situation must be a special circumstance and the injured could claim consolation money for such losses only if the offender knew or would have known of such special circumstances(Supreme Court Decision 96Da31574 delivered on Nov, 26, 1996, etc.). That is to say, Supreme Court regards mental suffering through person's property right invaded by a tort as damages that have arisen through special circumstances. According to Civil law article 393 (2), the injured could claim consolation money for such losses only if only if the offender had foreseen or could have foreseen such circumstances. Also our court will solve through damages for non-pecuniary loss by complementary function of consolation money in that pecuniary loss could be difficult to valuate.

  • PDF

Gene-Editing: Interpretation of Current Law and Legal Policy

  • Kim, Na-Kyoung
    • Development and Reproduction
    • /
    • v.21 no.3
    • /
    • pp.343-349
    • /
    • 2017
  • tWith the development of the third-generation gene scissors, CRISPR-Cas9, concerns are being raised about ethical and social repercussions of the new gene-editing technology. In this situation, this article explores the legislation and interpretation of the positive laws in South Korea. The BioAct does not specify and regulate 'gene editing' itself. However, assuming that genetic editing is used in the process of research and treatment, we can look to the specific details of the regulations for research on humans as well as gene therapy research in order to see how genetic editing is regulated under the BioAct. BioAct differentiates the regulation between (born) humans and embryos etc. and the regulation differ entirely in the manner and scope. Moreover, due to the fact that gene therapy products are regarded as drugs, they fall under different regulations. The Korean Pharmacopoeia Act put stringent sanctions on clinical trials for gene therapy products and the official Notification "Approval and Examination Regulations for Biological Products, etc." by Food and Drug Safety Administration may be applied to gene editing for gene therapy purposes.