“基因编辑婴儿事件”与生命法学之证成

“Gene Edited Baby” and the Justification for Life Jurisprudence

在对待"基因编辑婴儿"等类似事件中,生命伦理学、医事法学、卫生法学以及生命法学各自的视角与关注的面向是存在极大差异的。生命伦理学往往会立足于应用伦理尤其是基因伦理的视角研究事件背后的哲理和事件所反映出的伦理缺失以及强化对此类事件伦理审查和监管的必要性与紧迫性,医事法学则通常会立足于私法调整的角度探讨事件中诸如受体权益保障与救济等在内的私法原理与技术,卫生法学往往更习惯于从行政规制的视角查找事件所反映出来的卫生监管或伦理审查的问题及其对策,只有生命法学会在了解和明确相关生命伦理与哲理的基础上,全面研究事件所折射出的包括民法、刑法以及行政法等各个部门法在内的诸多法理问题,并在全面考量其法理的基点上,分析这类事件的法律风险及其立法对策。就此而言,相比于医事法学与卫生法学,生命法学具有更为宽阔的视野以及更为科学的研究方法,它实际上更有助于从学理上解释并从实践中解决诸如"基因编辑婴儿事件"等在内的诸多生命伦理与法律事件。

On treating such event as Gene edited babies, bioethics, medical law, health law as well as life jurisprudence have their enormously different perspectives and concerns. Bioethics usually explores the lack of ethics and how to strengthen ethical review in such events on the point of applied ethics, particularly regarding gene ethics. Medical law always emphasizes the protection of rights and interests from a perspective of private law. Health law is applied to find answers for the problems of health administrative supervision or ethical review on the point of administrative regulation. Only life jurisprudence could, on the basis of clarifying the bioethics principle, comprehensively consider all of the theoretical problems coming from such events in all the law such as civil law, criminal law and administrative law and analyses the legal risks as well as their countermeasures. In this regard, life jurisprudence has a wider view and much more scientific methodology compared to medical law and health law, which helps it better explain in theory as well as resolve in practice the bioethical and legal problems in such event as gene edited babies.