Yesterday, I had completed reading the book "reproductive medicine and life ethics".

I was interested in the contents and I want to introduce a part of the book to you.

-----

In the case of "In vitro fertilization (IVF)" that called "baby born through in vitro fertilization", one of the embryos after cell division is returned to uterus.

"Cell division" means a number of embryos, and "a number of embryos" means "existing some of the unnecessary cell"

One problem is

"How do you handle the unnecessary cells?"

- The U.S law says that "possible to reuse them for R&D naturally if throwing away"

- The German law says that "impossible to use them, because of a basic of the human"

Both laws say the exact opposite.

I think that Japanese law seems to be annoying the big issue.

-----

This is one dilemma.

German law allows abortion. That means that German law admit that embryos does not have a human rights

Against the logic, the German laws use the theory of "emergency evacuation",

whose typical example is

When you are in distress at sea and the other and you had caught in a piece of wood, you are not guilty even if you commandeer the wood and kill the other."

The German law says the following,

"Abortion is a kind of "emergency evacuation" in order to save the people who don’t have a capability of child care in a crisis of the forthcoming time"

"In comparison, can any R&D have the justice like this "emergency evacuation"?"

-----

Hmmm.

It is a persuasive theory isn't it?

I would defensively to words like "ethics" and "common sense" and I don't agree fully with the legislative intent of the German law. But I feel very happy with reading the logical deployment of such ethics.