Geum.ru

Программа 68-ой научно-практической конференции студентов, магистрантов и аспирантов белорусского

Вид материалаПрограмма

Содержание


Some legal issues of the transplantation in the Republic of Belarus
Подобный материал:
1   ...   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   ...   25



Some legal issues of the transplantation in the Republic of Belarus

  1. Shetsko, BSU 1st year student,

academic adviser – L. Laptsinskaya, senior reader



The principal normative legal act, which regulates the transplantation on the territory of Belarus is the Law of the Republic of Belarus “On the transplantation of human organs and tissues” 2007.[1] The author examines the presumption of consent and offers some measures to improve the regulation of taking out organs and tissues from a cadaveric donor.

According to parts 3, 4 art.11 of the Law taking out organs and tissues from cadaveric donor is regulated by the presumption of consent – that is, if a person (or the member of his/her family) didn’t express his/her refusal to giving the organs to anyone else after the death, he/she is deemed to agree to such actions. The realization of this principle in the Republic of Belarus is connected with some psychological problems. One of them is the dissatisfaction of the members of the family, who were not notified of the operation. The other is doctors’ misgivings about the family’s revenge, in case they are against. It should be observed, though, that according to the Law, it is not obligatory for doctors to talk to the relatives of a dead about the prospective taking-out of organs. Thereby, if by the moment of such an action doctors were not informed about a dead’s refusal to be a donor, the operation is not unlawful.

After all, the legitimacy of doctors’ actions doesn’t solve the problems mentioned. What is more, such manipulations deprive a person of the right to decide the destiny of the body after the death. Under part 2 art. 17 of Additional Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, on Transplantation of Organs and Tissues of Human Origin neither organs nor tissues can be taken out if a person protested against it. [2] The fixation of this principle on the international level proves its progressiveness and deep respect for human rights. According to the Belarusian law, the absence of any information that one was against being a donor after the death gives doctors the right to start an operation, but it doesn’t rule out the possibility of a person’s disagreement to this. So, the official fixation of the presumption of consent in the Law without pointing out the necessity of giving a talk to a dead’s family seems to be inhumane.

On the other hand, it should be mentioned, that taking out organs and tissues from a cadaveric donor is often performed in the conditions that simply preclude the opportunity to give such a talk. In this situation an organ can become unfit for a transfer and an operation becomes impossible because of the time spent. This may lead to the diminution in the number of graftings made in Belarus, overloading of waiting lists and an increase in the mortality among those who stand in a queue for transplantation. That is, the fixation of the obligation to give a talk to the members of a potential donor’s family is considered to be inhumane to a prospective recipient.

Carrying out a range of special measures to ascertain one’s consent to being a donor as fast as possible seems to be the best solution to the hurdles stated. In order to provide these measures a republican data bank should be created. The main objective of it is to contain full information about the people who are against serving as donors. For the most effective realization of the human right to decide the destiny of the body after the death it must be compulsory for all therapeutists in clinics and doctors in charge to inform patients about the possibility to become a donor. Apart from this they must register a person’s refusal in the republican data base if necessary. Thereby a doctor will be able to find out whether one is against serving as a donor or not in a few seconds, and the absence of necessity to give a talk to a dead’s family will drastically reduce the number of people waiting for an organ. This is very important, because the period of the vitality of some of them is too short (from 4 days to 1.5 minutes) What is more, active policy of the government, medical community, religious and public organizations can make a success in popularizing the donorship and cut down on the amount of refusals. For example, Spain has become one of the world’s leaders in this sphere after carrying out such activities. [3] All in all, the measures offered can drastically change the situation and improve the efficiency of the legal regulation of transplantation in the Republic of Belarus.

Literature

  1. The Law of the Republic of Belarus “On the transplantation of human organs and tissues” of March, 4th 1997, № 28-З (09.01.2007 № 207-З) // National Center of Legal Information [Electronic resource]. – 2007. – ссылка скрыта. – Date of access: 16.03.2011.
  2. Additional Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, on Transplantation of Organs and Tissues of Human Origin // Council of Europe [Electronic resource]. – 2008. –http:/conventions.coe.int. – Date of access: 13.03.2011.
  3. Smirnow, F. The presumption of donorship / F. Smirnow // Medical newspaper [Electronic resource]. – 2000. – № 56. – .rusmedserv.com. – Date of access: 08.03.2011.


2 место:

Legal regulation of marijuana in the United States


Денисюк Д., студ. 2.к.,

научный руководитель – Лаптинская Л.С.,ст.преподаватель


The Cannabis ( the marijuana plant) has a long history of medical, religious and industrial uses dating back thousands of years and today it is the most widely used illegal drug in the world. According to National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2008, more than 100 million Americans (42 % of adults) have ever tried it and 15 million have used it in the past month. Even Barack Obama said in his pre-election speech that, when he had been a kid, he had hailed frequently. Marijuana is the largest cash crop in the United States, because the value of produced marijuana is over $35 billion that is more than the value of corn and wheat combined.

In response to a substantial increase in drug use in America in 1970 the US Congress established the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse. The Commission`s report “Drug use in America: problem in perspective” was issued in March 1973, this act summarized the findings concerning the drug use patterns in the US. It proposed a framework for policymaking, legal regulation, prevention and treatment of drug use, as drugs still remained to be a crime cause. Later, The National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse identified four models of availability for psychoactive substances. The first involved no special controls: the substance was treated in the same way as other market commodities; the second provided special control, but the substance was available for self-defined purposes. The third model limited availability to specific purposes (mostly medical). Under the fourth approach, the substance was not legally available at all, except for the research purpose. The first two models can be characterized as “regulatory” approaches and the second two as “prohibitory” approaches. In 1970, under the Controlled Substances Act, the manufacture and distribution of cocaine, opiates and cannabis were unlawful on both federal and state levels. Time passed, and Americans became less conservative. Since 1996, fourteen states have passed laws permitting the medical use of marijuana.

California (the first state to OK medical marijuana purchase) and Colorado are considered to be in the forefront of the burgeoning industry. In Colorado many labs are existing to provide medical testing and certification of marijuana specimens for the hundreds of retail dispensaries, and state-certified individuals. Testing is also offered to certified growers and to manufacturers of “edibles” – the cannabis-laced caramels, ice creams, chocolate-covered cherries and candies. The Full Spectrum Laboratories in Colorado do this varied service and are able to fulfill some complicated tests. THC(tetrahydracannabinol) is the most psychoactive component of the plant, producing the euphoria that people refer to as “getting high,” but medical marijuana experts generally are far more enthusiastic about another active ingredient, cannabidiol (CBD).

According to Bob Winnicki, one of the full-time scientists of the FSL, CBD produces the largest number of medical effects, such as anti-anxiety, anti-inflammatory effects; it easies the symptoms of arthritis, diabetes, nausea, lowers blood pressure. But many of the distributers grow the plant in their kitchens and medical properties of marijuana decline as well as CBD content. People sometimes get sick, so they think that the stuff is adulterated. FDA (Food and Drug Administration) has a vital role to play in correcting public misinformation regarding marijuana.

Under the state law you can start growing marijuana legally after getting a license, that means that you are able to buy, use and grow marijuana for medical reasons. A patient can have someone else grow the pot simply by possessing a photocopy of the card. In other words all this provides an opportunity for booming business, that pays huge fees plus ongoing sales tax – a great economic profit for the US. But what is really interesting, that marijuana is still banned on the federal level, as the federal legislation is predominant it should be prosecuted and classified as a violation of the federal law. Why no action is taken? The answer is that it is up to the federal government to say whether they want to prosecute them or not. President Barack Obama made his support for medical marijuana known during the 2008 election campaign and it has since become official policy.

To sum up, I would like to say, that phenomenon of marijuana, a drug on the one hand and a miracle cure without drawbacks on the other, is going to be a burning issue for dozens of years. Nowadays it has corresponding legal regulation: a ban on the federal level and limited access on the local. Due to the current political authority marijuana selling is not prosecuted, but it should be, as there arises another problem – a gap in enforcement of the federal law. Democracy – one of the principles of American society allows people themselves to rule their lives. Fifty-five percent of the people surveyed (CNBC poll) said they oppose complete legalization of marijuana, while one-third of the country is in favor of the idea. Will cannabis be treated like coke, available for everybody, anywhere, at any time? Only time will show.


Literature:
  1. Marijuana and Money [Electronic Resource].- ссылка скрыта, 2011.-Mode of access: ссылка скрыта. -Date of access: 15.04.2011
  2. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2008,Table G.1 and G.5.
  3. Gettman, J. “Marijuana Production in the United States”,The Bulletin of Cannabis Reform, No. 2, December 2006.
  4. NATIONAL COMMISSION ON MARIHUANA AND DRUG ABUSE. (1973). Drug abuse in America: Problem in perspective. Washington. DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.



3 место:

Family Violence


Olga Rudnitskaya, BSU 1st year student,

academic advisor – L. Laptinskaya, senior reader


Domestic violence as a factor of social disadvantage has always been a problem of all nations and peoples living in different corners of our globe. This problem is one of the most pressing topics of humanity. Society's attitude to family violence has changed. Previously, many types of domestic violence were actually legalized. In London at the beginning of the century there was a rule: "Male is entitled to beat his quarrelsome wife at home, in case that the stick he uses will be thicker than the thumb of his hand." In America in 1824, the law officially freed men from responsibility for corporal punishment of wives in cases of "extreme necessity". In America and Europe, domestic violence became a social problem and received a negative assessment by the society in the 70-s of the 20th century. And in Belarus there started a discussion of family violence since 1993. It was initiated by women's organizations.

Under the domestic violence should be understood any intentional act by one member of the family against another, if the act violates the constitutional rights and freedoms of members of the family, it causes him physical pain, harm, or carries a threat of physical or psychological harm of a family member. [1]

Family is the basic unit of our society. It has its own life circle and its own particular dynamics based on psychological, emotional and inter-personal factors specific to the group. [2, p.11] The social problem of domestic violence is multiple, its forms and types are multiple too. These forms are: physical, psychological, sexual and economical.

The phenomenon is fairly widespread and it affects all the members of the family. Thus this problem is divided into three types: violence against children, against the elderly and violence between husband and wife. [3, с.1]

The main factors that breed violence are: alcoholism, drugs, prostitution, unemployment, anxiety about the future, hidden mental problems, economical problems and jealousy. [2, p. 10] And some people just believe in severe upbringing. Childhood plays its role as well. Adults who abuse or neglect children or their intimate partner have had a very hard childhood. Some of these people were physically abused in their childhood. [4, p.62] It is a vicious circle: violence gives rise to violence.

According to the statistics one in four women has experienced domestic violence in her lifetime, mostly by an intimate partner. Women of different races are equally vulnerable. On average, more than three women and one man are murdered by their intimate partners in the USA every day. Violence against a male has grown appreciably. That, to my mind, stems from female’s emancipation. In a survey of American families, 50% of the men who frequently assaulted their wives also frequently abused their children. Violence against the elderly is widely spread too. It is the most hidden phenomenon in domestic violence. There is 36% of physical violence and 81% of psychological violence against the elderly. [5]

Although there are many reasons, they all stem from the fact that, by definition, everything takes place “privately” within the family. Victims rarely complain. If they are children, they’re often unable to voice their complaints, are afraid to do so or are not aware of their situation as they have no point of comparison. If they are women, they often keep quiet too, either because of ignorance of their rights or fear of the consequences, or because they are trying to save the family, particularly for the sake of children, or for psychological, emotional or cultural reasons. [2, p.10] For example, in England, if a woman, beaten by her husband, goes to the police, the authorities will remove children from such home. So the reasons why people keep silent are obvious. [4, p.58] Silence is often due to lack of assistance agencies because of ignorance of their existence, along with a fear of criminal procedures. As a result, violence within the family remains hidden, and there is very little statistical guidance in the matter.

After analyzing all the literature and statistics, it can be said that people are not informed enough of this problem. Most people consider physical violence to be a normal way of child upbringing and don’t think that psychological violence exists. In conclusion, I can say that we should raise public concern to this problem, begin to inform and to apply to the public and show that it is not the problem of one particular family, but of the whole society. Public support is necessary in any criminal prevention policy, and it is especially necessary for the prevention of violence in the family. In this field, intervention of neighbors, teachers, colleagues or welfare associations is essential. In view of the particular nature of violence in the family, it would be desirable to have special criminal law definitions for these offences. This would contribute to a clearer picture of the phenomenon.

Literature

  1. Шакина, В.А. Что такое насилие. [Электронный ресурс]. - Иркутск, 2008. – Режим доступа: tharmony.ru/chto/main.phpl Дата доступа: 01.04.2011.
  2. Violence in the family. – Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publ., 1986.- (Legal affairs) – 15 p.
  3. Брайцева, Е.А. Женское супружеское насилие: авторефер. дис. канд. социолог.: 26.12.08/ Е.А. Брайцева; Нижегородский гос. ун-т. – Нижний Новгород, 2008. – 34 с.
  4. Criminological aspects of the ill-treatment of children in the family/ Europ. Comm. On Crime Problems. – Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publ., 1981. – 153 p.
  5. Domestic Violence// Resource Center [Electronic resource]. – Mode of access: or.org/domestic/viblence/resources/C61/. – Date of access: 18.04.2011.



Секция «Современные аспекты лингвострановедения»


1 место:


Conformity. The Influence of the Majority

Аксючиц М., студ. 2 К., научный руководитель – Дмитриева Э.А., старший

преподаватель кафедры английского языка гуманитарных специальностей