Certain Problems of Citizens’ Rights Protection when Using Genomic Technologies

In the context of the rapid development of new medical technologies, the problem of protecting the rights of citizens and ensuring respect for human dignity is becoming increasingly urgent. The authors come to the conclusion that the protection of the patient’s rights when using genomic technologies can be carried out in the order of claim proceedings. Typical methods of protection are recovery of damages in the event of injury to health, compensation for moral damage in connection with the violation of such non-material benefits as life, health, physical integrity, privacy. Particular attention is given to the problem of children’s rights protection when using genomic technologies, including the right to natural biological origin, the right to know their biological parents and family (genetic) history, since the use of advances in genetics and biomedicine by one generation of people can be a serious challenge to the existence of fundamental freedoms and equality of future generations.At the moment, states should define the limits of possible intervention in the sphere of private (parental) arbitrariness in order to prevent future harm to children born with the help of modern technologies. Consideration of individual problems of the rights of citizens protection when using genomic technologies indicates objective difficulties in finding solutions due to bioethical principles, the need to ensure a fair balance between the interests of the parties to the relevant relationship and third parties, and the need to minimize potential risks. The breakthrough achievements of medical and biological science pose an important task for the state to develop an effective system of legal guarantees aimed at ensuring respect for human dignity, protecting the rights and interests of an individual, preventing the biotechnological construction of a person for the purposes of eugenic practice, etc.

1. Bogatyreva NV, Rossik VE, Bogatyrev VA, Shishkinskaya NV. Kommentariy k Federalnomu zakonu ot 5 yulya 1996. № 86-FZ «O gosudarstvennom regulirovanii v oblasti genno-inzhenernoy deyatelnosti» (postateynyy) [Comment to Federal law No. 86-FZ of July 5, 1996 "On state regulation in the field of genetic engineering" (article-by-article)]. Legal reference system "Konsultant Plus:" [Electronic resource]. «KonsultantPlus». (In Russ.)

2. Bersimbayev RI. Fundamentalnye issledovaniya i biotekhnologiya [Basic research and biotechnology]. Biotekhnologiya. Teoriya i praktika [Biotechnology. Theory and practice]. 2007;1:5-10. (In Russ.)

3. Vavilycheva T. Tendentsii razvitiya rossiyskoy sudebnoy praktiki po voprosam prav cheloveka v oblasti biomeditsiny [Trends in the development of Russian judicial practice on human rights issues in the field of Biomedicine]. Pretsedenty Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka [Precedents of the European Court of human rights]. 2017;9:20-31. (In Russ.)

4. Montgomery J. Modifikatsiya genoma cheloveka: vyzovy so storony sfery prav cheloveka, obuslovlennye nauchno-tekhnicheskimi dostizheniyami [Modification of the human genome: challenges from the field of human rights caused by scientific and technical achievements]. Pretsedenty evropeyskogo suda po pravam cheloveka. Prava cheloveka i biomeditsina. Spetsialnyy vypusk [Precedents of the European Court of human rights. Human rights and Biomedicine. Special issue]. 2018;7:29-42. (In Russ.)

5. Mokhov AA. Dela o preduprezhdenii prichineniya vreda v budushchem (na primere genomnykh issledovaniy i vnedreniya ikh rezultatov v praktiku) [Cases on prevention of harm in the future (on the example of genomic research and implementation of their results in practice)]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa. 2019;2:105-20. (In Russ.)

6. Muradyan EM. Preventivnye iski [Preventive claims]. Gosudarstvo i pravo [State and law]. 2001;4:23-7. (In Russ.)

7. O’Sullivan S. V poiskakh balansa mezhdu tekhnicheskim progressom i uvazheniem chelovecheskogo dostoinstva [In search of a balance between technological progress and respect for human dignity]. Pretsedenty evropeyskogo suda po pravam cheloveka. Prava cheloveka i biomeditsina. Spetsialnyy vypusk [Precedents of the European Court of human rights. Human rights and Biomedicine. Special issue]. 2018;7:5 - 10. (In Russ.)

8. Popova OV. Issledovanie eticheskikh problem genetiki v otechestvennoy filosofskoy traditsii (k istorii idei biotekhnologicheskogo konstruirovaniya cheloveka) [Research on ethical problems of genetics in the domestic philosophical tradition (to the history of the idea of biotechnological construction of man)]. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie [Knowledge. Understanding. Skill]. 2017;3:20-30. (In Russ.)

9. Trikoz EN. Zashchita prav cheloveka v kontekste razvitiya bioetiki i genomiki (obzor mezhdunarodnogo kruglogo stola) [Protection of human rights in the context of the development of bioethics and genomics (review of the international round table)]. Vestnik RUDN. Seriya: Yuridicheskie nauki [RUDN Journal. Series: Legal Sciences]. 2019;23(1):141-54. (In Russ.)

10. Yudin BG. Chelovek kak obekt, potrebitel i mishen tekhnonauki [Man as an object, consumer and target of technoscience]. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie [Knowledge. Knowledge. Skill]. 2016;5:5-22. (In Russ.)

11. Anderson J. Review: Habermas J. The future of human nature. Ethics. 2005:115(4):816-21. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/430477 [cited 2019 December 10]. (In Russ.)

12. Davis D. Genetic dilemmas: Reproductive technology, Parental choice and children futures. Psychology Press; 2001. (In Eng.)

13. Rosato J. The children of Art (Assisted reproductive technology): Should the Law Protect them from Harm. Utah Law Abstract. 2004;1:57-110. (In Eng.)

14. Somervill M. Children’s human rights to natural biological origins and family structure. International Journal of the Family Law. 2010;35(1):35-53. (In Eng.)