Warnock Report, Hague & Tokyo: Human Rights Milestones
Warnock Report
1984, London, England
Key Assumptions (1982-84)
Made by the Commission of Inquiry into Human Fertilization and Embryology, consisting of 15 members from diverse academic and professional backgrounds, led by the Cambridge philosopher Mary Warnock.
Major Cases
- Determine the social, ethical, and legal aspects of assisted reproduction.
- Determine the period of embryonic development during which research should be allowed on human embryos.
Conclusions
- The age limit for research on embryos is 14 days after conception.
- Adopted the legal term “non-biological or medical pre-embryo“, which has served legislators in several countries to allow assisted reproduction by the method of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. This involves the creation, manipulation, and destruction of human embryos until day 14 after fertilization. This term was adopted to give greater consistency to the findings and facilitate their acceptance by the public.
Declaration of the Hague
February 4-6, 1999, The Hague, Netherlands
Key Assumptions
Reaffirms the ICPD (International Conference on Population and Development) 1994, concerning food safety and the environment, as well as reproductive health and reproductive rights, to reaffirm the Cairo Declaration on overpopulation and development adopted by parliamentarians.
Tokyo Treaty
1975, Tokyo, Japan
Key Assumptions
The doctor has the privilege and duty to practice their profession in the service of humanity, preserve and restore bodily and mental health without personal bias, and alleviate the suffering of their patients. They must maintain the utmost respect for human life, even under threat, and never use their medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity.
For purposes of this Declaration, torture is defined as physical or mental suffering inflicted deliberately, systematically, or wantonly by one or more persons acting alone or on the orders of any authority to force another person to yield information, make a confession, or for any other reason.
Declaration
- The doctor shall not countenance, accept, or participate in torture or other procedures of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, whatever the crime attributed to the victim, whether suspected, accused, or guilty, and whatever their beliefs or motives and in all situations, including armed conflict or civil strife.
- The doctor will not provide any place, instrument, substance, or knowledge to facilitate the practice of torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, or to decrease the resilience of the victim to endure such treatment.
- The physician must have complete clinical independence in deciding the type of care for the person responsible. The doctor’s fundamental role is to alleviate human suffering; no personal, collective, or political reason shall prevail against this noble goal.
- In the case of a prisoner who refuses nourishment and if the doctor feels they are able to understand rationally and sanely the consequences of such voluntary refusal of food, they should not be fed artificially. The decision on the rational capacity of the prisoner must be confirmed by at least one doctor involved in the case. The physician should explain to the prisoner the consequences of their refusal to feed.
- The World Medical Association supports and should urge the international community, national medical associations, and medical colleagues to support the doctor and their family from threats or reprisals received for refusing to accept the use of torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.