Abstract
This chapter discusses the acceptance of the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UDBHR), by acclamation. It highlights that the Declaration has broadened the scope of bioethics, by integrating international human rights law into the field of biomedicine, and considered about the environment biosphere and biodiversity. The Declaration is seen as a global benchmark for all countries, as it focuses on the concepts of common principles, shared values and internal cooperation between countries. This paper also critically analyses the limitations of the UDBHR, commenting on the difficulty in the application of human rights and solidarity in the Asian and global context, respectively. However, despite its limitations, the Declaration is still relevant and applicable for all, as it takes into consideration the diverse culture in different countries. The UDBHR also strives to offer a more comprehensive understanding of the principles, by issuing further guidance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
UDBHR Article 6 (2): “Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent. Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice.”
Declaration of Helsinki : 26. In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study. The potential subject must be informed of the right to refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as to the methods used to deliver the information.
After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed.
- 2.
Article 12 further states that “such considerations are not to be invoked to infringe upon human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms, nor upon the principles set out in this Declaration, nor to limit their scope”. This may pose constraints on nations that are not in adherence with international human rights law.
References
Andorno, R. 2007. Global bioethics at UNESCO: In defence of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. Journal of Medical Ethics 33: 150–154.
Andorno, R. 2009. Human dignity and human rights as a common ground for a global bioethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34: 223–240.
Bagheri, A. 2011. The impact of the UNESCO declaration in Asian and global bioethics. Asian Bioethics Review 3(2): 52–64.
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences and World Health Organization. 2002. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects.
Council of Europe. 1997. Convention for the protection of human rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the application of biology and medicine: Convention on human rights and biomedicine.
Gunson, D. 2009. Solidarity and the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34: 241–260.
Hayry, M., and T. Takala. 2005. Human dignity, bioethics, and human rights. Developing World Bioethics 5(3): 225–233.
Heyd, D. 2007. Justice and solidarity: The contractarian case against global justice. Journal of Social Philosophy 38(1): 112–130.
Houtepen, R., and R. ter Meulen. 2000. New types of solidarity in the European welfare state. Health Care Analysis 8(4): 329–340.
Kirby, M. 2008–2009. Human rights and bioethics: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and UNESCO Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 25: 309–331.
Lenoir, N. 1998–1999. Universal declaration on the human genome and human rights: The first legal and ethical framework at the global level. Columbia Human Rights Law Review 30: 537–587.
Macklin, R. 2005. Yet another guideline? The UNESCO draft declaration. Developing World Bioethics 5(3): 244–250.
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1979a. Belmont report.
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1979b. Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Nuremberg Code. 1949. Trials of war criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council law no. 10, 2: 181–182.
Snead, O.C. 2009. Bioethics and self-governance: The lessons of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34: 204–222.
ten Have, H. 2006. The activities of UNESCO in the area of ethics. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16(4): 333–351.
ten Have, H.A., and M.S. Jean (Eds.). 2009. The UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. UNESCO Publishing.
UNESCO. 2003. Records of the General Conference, 32nd Session, Paris, 29 September to 17 October 2003, v. 1: Resolutions.
UNESCO. 2005. Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights.
UNESCO International Bioethics Committee. 2008. Report of the International Bioethics Committee of UNESCO on consent.
UNESCO International Bioethics Committee. 2010. Report of the International Bioethics Committee of UNESCO on social responsibility and health.
UNESCO International Bioethics Committee. 2013. The principle of respect for human vulnerability and personal integrity.
United Nations. 1948. Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
United Nations. (n.d.). Human rights law. Retrieved from The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/hr_law.shtml
United Nations Commission on Human Rights. 2003. Resolution 2003/69: Human rights and bioethics.
Wolinsky, H. 2006. Bioethics for the world. EMBO Reports 7(4): 354–358.
World Medical Association. 1964, Revised 2013. Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Magnus, R. (2016). The Universality of the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights . In: Bagheri, A., Moreno, J., Semplici, S. (eds) Global Bioethics: The Impact of the UNESCO International Bioethics Committee. Advancing Global Bioethics, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22650-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22650-7_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22649-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22650-7
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)