Reference re assisted human reproduction actand the future of technology-assisted reproduction and embryo research in Canada.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
1. Introduction In Reference Re Assisted Human Reproduction Act, (1) a split Supreme Court of Canada ruled that several provisions of the federal legislation governing assisted human reproduction and embryo research were ultra vires Parliament and unconstitutional. The decision is an advisory opinion on a reference question, (2) which means that it is not legally binding on the federal government. (2) The decision marks the latest chapter in the unsettled and controversial history of federal attempts to regulate this area, a journey that formally began in 1989, when the federal government established the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies (also known as the Baird Commission (4)) to investigate and make recommendations for the use of assisted reproductive technologies in Canada. (5) In 2004, federal legislation governing the area, titled the Assisted Human Reproduction Act (6) (the Act), was passed into law. The legislation, which was enacted under the federal criminal law power, established the federal government as the primary source of authority on matters of assisted human reproduction and embryo research. In September 2007, the Province of Quebec submitted a reference question to the Quebec Court of Appeal challenging the scope of federal involvement in this area. (7) The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Quebec. A federal appeal from that ruling is the subject of the Supreme Court decision under discussion here. This paper has a dual focus: to explain and analyze the decision, a complicated ruling handed down by a court split in a 4-4-1 formation, and to reflect on what the regulatory landscape for assisted human reproduction and embryo research would look like if the federal government accepts and faithfully implements the ruling. These matters are addressed in the two middle sections of the paper, which are bookended by a backgrounder section on the Act, a history of the case and relevant Canadian constitutional law principles, and concluding thoughts. 2. Background matters a) Overview of the Act The Assisted Human Reproduction Act was enacted into law in 2004 following almost a decade of deliberative provoked by concerns over technology-assisted procreation and research involving human embryos. (8) Activities preceding the Act include a Royal Commission study, a voluntary moratorium on certain reproductive and research practices, establishment of ethical guidelines to govern stem cell research, a series of failed or incomplete attempts to enact federal law to govern the area, and spirited public and legislative debate on both proposed legislation and the practices and technologies targeted for regulation. (9) The Act is a sweeping piece of legislation that combines prohibitions, regulatory controls, and diverse administrative mechanisms to govern a broad range of clinical, commercial, and research related to assisted procreation. These can be placed under three broad categories depending on the type of governance mechanism they attract: (i) that are prohibited without qualification (ss 5-7, 9), (ii) that ate prohibited with regulated exceptions (s 8), and (iii) controlled activities that are allowed if conducted with a license and in accordance with regulations (ss 10-13). Activities in the first category include: a. Certain creations or modifications of embryos, dones, or human reproductive material, (10) including the creation of human chimera embryos (11) and human clones, creation of in vitro human embryos for non-reproductive use, (12) performing sex selection procedures on an embryo intended for reproductive use, and germline genetic alterations; (13) b. Reproductive uses of hybrids, human chimera embryos, nonhuman gametes, cells, embryos or fetuses, and cells extracted from human embryos or fetuses; (14) c. Developing an embryo in vitro beyond fourteen days after fertilization or creation, excluding periods in which development is suspended; (15) d. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».