공지
- [ 2024-05-30 ] 2024년 제1차 사전연명의료의향서 등록기관 지정 결과 공고
- [ 2024-05-22 ] 2024년 한국생명윤리학회 춘계공동학술대회 개최 안내(6/28(금))
- [ 2024-05-22 ] 2024년 대한의료커뮤니케이션학회 춘계학술대회 개최 안내(6/8(토))
- [ 2024-05-10 ] 공용위원회 심의·협약 대상 및 비용 납부 안내 규정 공고
- [ 2024-05-07 ] 2024년 한국의료윤리학회 춘계학술대회 개최 안내(5/25(토))
관련 논문
*정책원 미소장 자료이며 관련 논문 소개 게시판입니다. 게시물 관련링크를 눌러 소속기관에서 열람가능한지 확인해주시기 바랍니다.
lib@nibp.kr
글 수 144
| 발행년 : | 2017 |
|---|---|
| 구분 : | 국내학술지 |
| 학술지명 : | 漢陽法學 |
| 관련링크 : | http://www.riss.kr/link?id=A105046734 |
헌법상 태아의 보호와 임신중절
= Constitutional protection of the fetus and abortion
- 저자[authors] 이광진(Lee, Kwang-Jin)
- 학술지명[periodical name] 漢陽法學
- 권호사항[Volume/Issue] Vol.28No.4[2017]
- 발행처[publisher] 한양법학회
- 자료유형[Document Type] 학술저널
- 수록면[Pagination] 129-148
- 언어[language] Korean
- 발행년[Publication Year] 2017
- 주제어[descriptor] 임신중절,과도한 부담,태아,생명권,프라이버시권,모자보건법,abortion,undue burden,fetus,right to life,right of privacy,Mother and Child Health Act
초록[abstracts]
[The current Constitution does not prescribe the right to life. However human life is protected by basic rights, whether or not there is a provision guaranteed in the Constitution. There is no doubt that the subject of the right to life includes the fetus, which is a life that has not yet been born. When does the fetus become the subject of the right to life as human? This is directly related to the issue of being protected from abortion, which is forced to die before the fetus can even begin life as a human being. And the problem of abortion is related to the fetus’s right to life, the mother"s privacy or self-determination regarding pregnancy. The U.S. Supreme Court has taken the position that it is a constitutional violation if the legal discipline of abortion causes undue burden on pregnant women. And recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that two provisons(admitting privileges requirement, surgical-center requirement) in a texas Law place a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking an abortion, constitute an undue burden on abortion access, and therefore violate the Constitution[Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, 579 U.S. 2016)]. By the way, I think that the consent of the spouse prescribed by current Mother and Child Health Act is unconstitutional according to the precedent of the United States. This is because it puts an undue burden on the woman to infringe her self-determination on pregnancy. Therefore, I think it is necessary to revise(amend) the Mother and Child Health Act to supplement the counsultation model in the current term model.]
목차[Table of content]
Ⅰ. 서론 Ⅱ. 헌법상 태아의 보호와 임신중절의 문제 Ⅲ. 미국연방대법원의 임신중절 관련 판례의 변화 Ⅳ. 결론 -현행 모자보건법의 개선방향에 관하여- 참고문헌 Abstract
(†04522) 서울 특별시 중구 남대문로 113 DB다동빌딩 5층
TEL : 02-737-8970 (기획운영팀)
Copyright (c)KONIBP All Right Reserved.
Copyright (c)KONIBP All Right Reserved.
2sisstore
