THE RIGHT TO SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH OF LGBTIQ PERSONS AND THE CHALLENGES OF BIOMEDICAL ASSISTED REPRODUCTION
Abstract
The mass application of modern medical biotechnology (BAF) and
its expansion on a global level have brought numerous challenges at the
individual and social level, and the very goal of reproductive technologies
has exceeded the treatment of infertility. For LGBTIQ people, the use of
BAF in the first place is a matter of reproductive justice that should provide
everyone, without distinction, economic, social and political power
and resources to make healthy decisions about their bodies, sexuality and
reproduction for themselves, their families and their union. The reality,
however, is that access to BAF is enjoyed by a small privileged group of
people, and many medically infertile persons do not seek BAF because of
the high cost of such treatment. As a result, the development of biomedical
technology is increasingly becoming a subject of reconsideration and
controversy, and less and less an achievement that supports life and health.
In this paper, the author discusses when and why access to BAF became
a matter of the LGBTIQ rights and whether access to BAF can really be
equal for all, given its costs? Finally, the author refers to BAF in terms of
domestic legislation and concludes the paper with a call for changes to the
legal solution that prohibits the use of BAF for LGBTIQ individuals and
couples in Serbia.
References
Literatura
1. Bilinović, A., 2016, Uticaj asistirane reprodukcije na redefinisanje socioloških pojmova
porodice i roditeljstva, doktorska disretacija, Novi Sad, Filozofski fakultet
Univerziteta u Novom Sadu.
2. Berkowitz, D., Marsiglio, W., 2007, Gay Men: Negotiating Procreative, Father, and
Family Identities, Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 69, No. 2.
3. Boucai, M., 2016, Is Assisted Procreation an LGBT Right?, Wisconsin Law Reviw,
p. 1065.
4. Calhaz-Jorge, C. et al., 2020, Survey on ART and IUI: Legislation, Regulation,
Funding and Registries in European Countries, The European IVF-monitoring
Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology
(ESHRE), Human Reproduction Open.
5. Cvejić Jančić, O., 2001, Da li je brak prevaziđen? – Novi oblici zajedničkog života
u savremenim pravima, Pravni život, Vol. 50, knj. 461, br. 9.
6. Cvetić, R., 2011, Pravna sposobnost i biomedicina – biomedicinska diskriminacija,
Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, 3.
7. Edel, F., 2015, Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights Relating to
Discrimination on Grounds of Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, Council of
Europe.
8. Ellis, E., Watson, P., 2013, EU Anti-Discrimination Law, 2nd edition, Oxford University
Press.
9. Factsheet – Sexual orientation issues, 2021, European Court for Human Rights.
10. Fleiner T., Basta Fleiner, L., 2009, Constitutional Democracy in a Multicultural
and Globalised World, Heidelberg, Berlin, Springer.
11. Fox, D., 2018, Privatizing Procreative Liberty in the Shadow of Eugenics, Journal
of Law and the Biosciences, June, Oxford Academic.
12. Gajin, S. (ur.), 2013, Model Zakona o registrovanim istopolnim zajednicama, Beograd,
CUPS.
13. Gebhard, J., Trimiño, D., 2012, Reproductive Rights, International Regulation,
Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Max Planck Institute for
Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg and Oxford University
Press.
14. Greenfeld, D. A., Seli, E., 2013, Assisted Reproduction in Same Sex Couples, in:
Sauer, M. (ed.) Principles of Oocyte and Embryo Donation, London, Springer.
15. Harris, J., 2003, Assisted Reproductive Technological Blunders (ARTBs), Journal
of Medical Ethics, Vol. 29, No. 4.
16. International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017, Human Reproduction,
Vol. 32, No. 9.
17. Jović, O., 2005, Surogat materinstvo – nova dimenzija roditeljstva, Beograd.
18. Kandić Popović, Z., 1998, Krivično pravna reakcija u domenu fertilizacije in vitro
i genetskih intervencija, Medicinsko pravo, Institut društvenih nauka, Beograd.
19. Kričković Pele, K., Kostić Zotović, M., 2018, Nove reproduktivne tehnologije u
Srbiji. Ko su žene u nacionalnom programu vantelesne oplodnje, Sociologija, Vol.
LX, br. 1.
20. Kričković Pele, K., Beker, K., 2014, Rodne i društvene kontroverze vantelesne
oplodnje u Srbiji – diskriminacija žena koje nisu rađale, Temida.
21. López, A., Betancourt, M., Casas, E. et al. 2021, The Need for Regulation in the
Practice of Human Assisted Reproduction in Mexico. An Overview of the Regulations
in the Rest of the World. Reproductive Health, 18, p. 241.
22. Mercat-Bruns, M., Oppenheimer, B. D., Sartorius, C., 2018, Comparative Perspectives
on the Enforcement and Effectiveness of Antidiscrimination Law, Challenges
and Innovative Tools, Springer International Publishing.
23. Morris, J. B., 2009, History of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Social Movements,
Washington, D.C., George Washington University.
24. Mršević, Z., 1997, Registrovano partnerstvo kao neophodna civilna opcija i deo
feminističke agende, Ženske studije, 7.
25. Mršević, Z., 2020, Analiza uslova i načina ostvarivanja biomedicinski potpomognute
oplodnje u Srbiji, Labris – organizacija za lezbejska ljudska prava, Beograd.
26. Petrušić, N., Simonović, I., 2014, Etičke i pravne dimenzije bioetičkih istraživanja,
Vodič za članove istraživačkih etičkih odbora, Niš, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u
Nišu.
27. Präg, P., Mills, C. M., 2015, Assisted Reproductive Technology in Europe. Usage
and Regulation in the Context of Cross-Border Reproductive Care, Families and
Societies, Working paper Series, 43.
28. Powell, A., 2018, The Problems with LGBTQ Health Care, The Harvard Gazette,
March, 23.
29. Radoman, M., 2019, Istopolne porodice – društvena realnost i izazovi.
30. Radi, B., 2020, Reproductive Injustice, Trans Rights, and Eugenics, Sexual and
Reproductive Health Matters Journal, Vol. 28, No. 1.
31. Samo neka je šareno – Istraživanje potreba i problema LGBT zajednice u Srbiji za
2018. godinu, Labris, Beograd.
32. Simić, J., 2019, Pravo na slobodu kretanja zbog lečenja – primer reproduktivnog
turizma u EU, Pravni zapisi, 2, str. 416 i 417.
33. Sjeničić, M., Sovilj, R., Stojković Zlatanović, S., 2018, Nove tendencije u razvoju
zakonodavstva u oblasti biomedicinski potpomognutog oplođenja, Pravni život:
list za pravna pitanja i praksu, Vol. 67, br. 9.
34. Thoreson, R. R., 2014, Transnational LGBT Activism, University of Minnesota
Press.
35. Vilić, D., 2020, Uticaj asistirane reproduktivne tehnologije na porodicu i roditeljstvo
u savremenom društvu, Zbornik radova, Porodica i savremeno društvo – izazovi
i perspektive, Banja Luka.
36. UNFPA: Akcioni program Konferencije UN o populaciji i razvoju, Kairo, 5‒13. 9.
1994. godine, paras. 7.2, 7.3.
37. Waaldijk, K., 2000, Levels of Legal Consequences of Marriage, Cohabitation and
Registered Partnership for Different-Sex and Same-Sex Partners: Comparative
Overview, in: Same-Sex Couples, Same-Sex Partnerships, and Homosexual Marriages:
A Focus on Cross-National Differential, Paris.
38. Wichterich, C., 2015, Esej: Seksualna i reproduktivna prava, Sveska 11, Berlin, Heinrich
Böll Stiftung.
39. Wyns, C. et al., 2021, ART in Europe, 2017: Results Generated from European
Registries by ESHRE, Human Reproduction Open, Vol. 2021, Issue 3, The European
IVF-Monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human
Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE).
40. Zegers-Hochschild, F., Adamson, G. D., Mouzon, J. de, Ishihara, O., Mansour, R.,
Nygren, K., Sullivan, E., Vanderpoel, S., for ICMART and WHO, 2009, International
Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART)
and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology,
2009, Fertility Sterility, 92:1520–4.
41. Živojinović, D., 2012, Princip jednakosti i pravo na asistiranu prokreaciju, Stanovništvo,
Vol. 50, br. 1, Beograd, Centar za demografska istraživanja, Institut
društvenih nauka.
Propisi
1. The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights on the Rights
of Women in Africa (Maputo Protocol), adopted 11th July 2003, entry into Force
25th November 2005.
2. Rezolucije Evropskog parlamenta od 24. juna 2021. o stanju u pogledu seksualnog
i reproduktivnog zdravlja i prava u EU u kontekstu zdravlja žena (2020/2215(INI).
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9–2021-0314_EN.html).
3. European Parliament, FEMM Committee, Draft Report on Sexual and Reproductive
Health and Rights (2013/2040(INI)) Committee on Women’s Rights and
Gender Equality, 2013/2040(INI) (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/
A-7–2013–0426_EN.html 5. 4. 2022).
4. Ustav Republike Srbije, Sl. glasnik RS, br. 98/06.
5. Zakona o biomedicinski potpomognutoj oplodnji, Sl. glasnik RS, br. 40/17 i
113/17 – dr. zakon.
6. Zakon o lečenju neplodnosti postupcima biomedicinski potpomognutog oplođenja,
Sl. glasnik RS, br. 72/09.
7. Zakon o potvrđivanju Konvencije o pravima osoba sa invaliditetom, Sl. glasnik
RS – Međunarodni ugovori, br. 42/09.
8. Zakon o ratifikaciji Konvencije o eliminisanju svih oblika diskriminacije žena, Sl.
list SFRJ – Međunarodni ugovori, br. 11/81.
9. Uputstvo RFZO-a br. 450– 1097/22 za sprovođenje lečenja neplodnost postupcima
BMPO od 25. 2. 2022. godine, (https://www.rfzo.rs/download/vto/Uputstvo%20
za%20sprovodjenje%20lecenja%20neplodnosti%20postupcima%20biomedicinski%
20potpomognutog%20oplodjenja%20(BMPO)28022022.pdf?fbclid=IwAR02SJ
AH4jvtNXIqRwjH82RWYJAgCbgB7W71CsNkvPaAy6xSv5ab0mFnuTc).
Sudska praksa
1. Supreme Court of the United States, Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015),
(https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14–556_3204.pdf).
2. ECtHR, Smith and Grady v. the United Kingdom, App. no. 33985/96 and 33986/96,
Judgment of 27 September 1999.
3. ECtHR, E.B. v. France, App. no. 43546/02, Judgment of 22 January 2008.
Izvori sa interneta
1. French parliament votes to extend IVF rights to lesbians and single women,
Agence France-Press in Paris, 29. 6. 2021, (https://www.theguardian.com/
world/2021/jun/29/french-parliament-votes-to-extend-ivf-rights-to-lesbiansand-
single-women).
2. Gajin, S., Politika srednjeg prsta, Peščanik, 25. 2. 2021, (https://pescanik.net/politika-
srednjeg-prsta/).
3. Stop za Zakon o istopolnim zajednicama: samo kupovina vremena? DW.com od
6. 5. 2021, (https://www.dw.com/sr/stop-za-zakon-o-istopolnim-zajednicama-samo-
kupovina-vremena/a-57440766).