Jump to content

Counting game

????

By ????
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

antijen

antijen

Posted
Posted

The boy and his microscope: interpreting section 56(1) of the National Health Act

Donrich Willem Jordaan


Abstract


This article looks at the classic conflict between freedom and propriety with reference to the use of human gametes (sperm and egg cells) in the South African law. The core question that is addressed is whether it is legal to use one?s own gametes, or other?s with their consent, for non-medical, non-sexual-intercourse purposes. This question is answered divergently by the two possible interpretations of the relevant statutory law, section 56(1) of the National Health Act, which is formulated ambivalently. Since these two possible interpretations are representative of the two poles of the freedom-propriety conflict, this matter can be perceived as a test of the depth of South African law?s commitment to the principle of freedom. Section 56(1) is analysed using the applicable common law presumptions, as well as human rights. To illustrate the practical implications of these analyses, a hypothetical case study of a boy who studies sperm cells under his microscope at home is sketched and used throughout the article. The analyses conclude that the interpretation must be followed that answers the core question in the affirmative (in favour of freedom), namely that it is indeed legal to use one?s own gametes, or other?s with their consent, for non-medical, non-sexual-intercourse purposes.


Full Text: PDF


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial Works License.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • van dessel
      Trees cut down in greendaIe

      By van dessel · Posted

      Saw that too and was disappointed b/c it WAS a serene, green oasis - that footpath between Greendale and Dulwich Hamlet football stadium. I suspect it might be for safety of walkers after dark so it prevents people hiding there? I don't know.  It was vandals b/c someone cleaned it up 😂 It's depressing that so much urban landscaping (i.e. getting rid of anything green) revolves around averting crime rather than with officers on foot to prevent crime and proper follow up. Benches taken out to stop loitering etc.  Teens and early 20s kids who still live at home need somewhere cheap to get out to and socialise and just chill and drink tinnies and smoke - esp on warm evenings when it's beautiful outside. In addition - it's depressing that no one cleans up the parking lot where the car wash is - just a disaster area now, I see my kids scanning around when we walk through wondering what the heck is going on there.  Does anyone know who owns that land?  
    • jazzer
      Birds in East Dulwich

      By jazzer · Posted

    • malumbu
      Bloody Sydenham Hill

      By malumbu · Posted

      I loved the Woodhouse.  It's been awful for years.  I cycle up Sydenham Hill to go to Sydenham or Crystal Palace. 
    • jazzer
      Bloody Sydenham Hill

      By jazzer · Posted

      I'm lucky if I can afford fish & chips take away, let alone the prices in the Wood House.  

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...