Correlation of private and public principles in the legal regulation of the use of genomic and assisted reproductive technologies

In the present article the author notes that the achievements of modern science in the field of biomedicine, in addition to ethical and moral issues, also raise the problem of determining the limits of state intervention in the regulation of the use of genomic and assisted reproductive technologies. This problem, to a certain extent, continues the discussion regarding the effect of public-law principles in the sphere of civil legislation.
In this connection, the question arises about the right of the state to interfere in the decision-making process of parents regarding the birth of children through the use of appropriate technologies, to establish age and other restrictions on persons who resort to these technologies, to determine the specifics of parental legal relations for such persons, etc., that is, to a large extent intrude on the private sphere of the citizen, the sphere that constitutes the privacy of his life.
The presented analysis of legislation and judicial practice shows that all states are currently in search of a fair balance between private and public interests in an area that has traditionally been governed exclusively by the private will of the person, in the sphere of the exercise of his or her reproductive right. That is why it is so difficult for society to perceive various interventions of public authorities, that is why it is so important that society does not perceive them as unfair.
As a result, the author concludes that as a priority the interests of the weak party in the relationship arising from the use of genomic and assisted reproductive technologies should be considered and protected — the interests of the child born with such technologies, while not allowing violation of the rights to life and health of others involved in such relationships, unreasonable invasion of their privacy.

1. Богданов Е. В. Проблемы объективации человека в праве // Современное право. — 2012. — № 10. — C. 41—46.

2. Богданов Е. В. Соотношение частного и публичного в гражданском законодательстве // Российская юстиция. — 2000. — № 4. — C. 10—16.

3. Богданова Е. Е. Защита интересов граждан при конфликте их личных неимущественных прав // Журнал российского права. — 2013. — № 12. — C. 75—86.

4. Богданова Е. Е. О правах на биоматериал человека // Гражданское право. — 2019. — № 4. — C. 28—32.

5. Боголепов Н. П. Учебник истории римского права / под ред. В. А. Томсинова. — М. : Зерцало, 2004. — 586 с.

6. Новиков В. Т., Новикова О. В. Феномен власти в классической и современной философии: сравнительный анализ // URL: https://elib.bsu.by/bitstream/123456789/14443/1/40-46pdf.pdf.

7. Пьянкова А. Ф. Баланс интересов в гражданском праве России и его обеспечение в договорных отношениях : автореф. дис. ... канд. юрид. наук. — Екатеринбург, 2013. — 27 c.

8. Alexy R. A Theory of Constitutional Rights. — Oxford, 2002. — 462 p.

9. Brigham A. Fordham Disability and designer babies //. — Valparaiso University Law Abstract. — 2011. — Vol. 45. — P. 115—143.

10. Davis D. Genetic dilemmas: Reproductive technology, Parental choice and children futures. — Psychology Press, 2001. — 224 p.

11. Habermas Ju. The future of human nature. Review by: Reviewed by Joel Anderson // Ethics. The University of Chicago Press/Stable. — July 2005. — Vol. 115. — No. 4. — P. 816—821. — URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/430477.

12. Henn W. Consumerism in Prenatal Diagnosis: A Challenge for Ethical Guidelines // J. Med. Ethics. — 2000. — Nо. 26. — P. 444—446.

13. Hensel Wendy F. The Disabling Impact of Wrongful Birth and Wrongful Life Actions // Harvard Civil Rights — Civil Liberties Law Abstract. — 2005. — Vol. 40. — P. 141—195. — URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=932688.

14. Kelley P. J. Wrongful Life, Wrongful Birth, and Justice in Tort Law. — Wash. U. L. Q. — 919, 939 (1979). — P. 919—963.

15. Moller K. Balancing and the Structure of Constitutional Rights // International Journal of Constitutional Law. — 2007. — Vol. 5. — Is. 3. — P. 453—468.

16. Raposo V. L. Are Wrongful Life Actions Threatening the Value of Human Life? // Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. — 2017. — Vоl. 14. — Is. 3.

17. Rosato J. The children of Art (Assisted reproductive technology): Should the Law Protect them from Harm // Utah Law Abstract. — 2004. — Vоl. 57. — P. 57—110.

18. Sandel M. J. The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering. — 2007. — Nо. 46. — 176 p.

19. Somervill M. Children’s human rights to natural biological origins and family structure// International Journal of the Family Law. — 2010. — № 35. —Vol. 1. — P. 35—54.