S.H. and others v. Austria and circumvention tourism.
This commentary discusses the decision in S.H. and Others v. Austria from a political theoretical and bioethical perspective. I focus on the opinion's discussion of what I call 'circumvention tourism', travelling abroad for the purpose of circumventing domestic prohibitions, especially as to medical services. The majority opinion in the case touts Austria's allowance of circumvention tourism for reproductive technology services that are illegal on Austrian soil as a reason to find as lawful Austria's prohibition on using those services on Austrian soil. To the contrary, I show that, in many ways, permitting circumvention tourism for these services while prohibiting them domestically is deeply problematic.
Harvard Law School, Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics, Cambridge, MA, USA. Igcohen@law.harvard.edu
I
I
Glenn Cohen
D033001:Directed Tissue Donation / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D026689:Ethical Analysis; D006806:Human Rights / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D007600:Judgment / Q000941:ethics*