Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Australia after Cresswell and Chapman: A Legal and Regulatory Paradox, or an Opportunity for Uniformity?
Austin Authors: Mills, Christopher D
Affiliation: Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
West Gippsland Health Care Group
Flinders University of South Australia
University of Melbourne;Victorian Liver Transplant Unit, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
Issue Date: Apr-2020
Publication information: Journal of law and medicine 2020; 27(3): 741-761
Abstract: Australia, like many overseas jurisdictions, has recognised the need to cope with advancing medical technology and changing community attitudes towards assisted reproductive technology (ART). Despite this, several States in Australia still do not have legislative instruments regulating ART, and those that have legislated have done so in a non-uniform way. In 2018/2019, four cases came before State Supreme Courts, where the female applicants had to endure significant legal battle in order to utilise their late partner's gametes, highlighting the inability of the law to provide an appropriate clinical framework. This article outlines and discusses the current position of Australian States on the utilisation of posthumous gametes and how the recent decisions of the Supreme Courts of New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia augment the current law and National Health and Medical Research Council Guidelines, and finally, considers how future legislation might account for the potential posthumous utilisation of oocytes.
Journal: Journal of law and medicine
PubMed URL: 32406633
ISSN: 1320-159X
Type: Journal Article
Subjects: posthumous assisted reproductive technology
posthumous gamete
posthumous in vitro fertilisation
posthumous reproduction
posthumous sperm
Appears in Collections:Journal articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

checked on Feb 3, 2023

Google ScholarTM


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.