Suchergebnisse

Background. South Africa (SA) currently has a golden opportunity to legislate on human heritable genome editing (HHGE), as the country is revising its assisted reproductive technology regulations. A set of sub-regulations that deals with HHGE, which could seamlessly slot into the current regulations, has already been developed. The principles underlying the proposed set of sub-regulations are as follows: HHGE should be regulated to improve the lives of the people and should not be banned; the well-established standard of safety and efficacy should be used in the regulation of HHGE; quality of life is what matters, and not preserving a 'normal' genome; parents' reproductive autonomy must be respected; and equality of access to approved HHGE technology should be promoted.
Objectives. To ascertain whether the proposed set of sub-regulations that deals with HHGE is aligned with public opinion in SA, and SA's Bill of Rights.
Methods. Public opinion in SA is determined with reference to a deliberative public engagement study on HHGE conducted among South Africans, and the relevant rights in the Bill of Rights are interpreted with reference to recent case law.
Results. This proposed set of sub-regulations that deals with HHGE is aligned with public opinion in SA, and SA's Bill of Rights.
Conclusion. Despite the legal and ethical complexities of HHGE, the proposed set of sub-regulations provides a targeted and effective legislative approach. They fit seamlessly into the country's existing health law framework, creating specific legal standards for HHGE that align with both public opinion and the country's Bill of Rights.

Posthumous conception – when a deceased person's gametes are used for procreative purposes – made its debut in South African (SA) courts in NC v Aevitas Fertility Clinic. A widow was granted the right to use her deceased husband's sperm for procreation. Against the background of legislative ambiguity, this case creates legal certainty that posthumous conception is legally permissible in SA – at least where deceased persons provided written consent that their gametes can be used by their surviving spouses or life partners after their death, and where there is no controversy about such consent.

Despite the tremendous promise offered by artificial intelligence (AI) for healthcare in South Africa, existing policy frameworks are inadequate for encouraging innovation in this field. Practical, concrete and solution-driven policy recommendations are needed to encourage the creation and use of AI systems. This article considers five distinct problematic issues which call for policy development: (i) outdated legislation; (ii) data and algorithmic bias; (iii) the impact on the healthcare workforce; (iv) the imposition of liability dilemma; and (v) a lack of innovation and development of AI systems for healthcare in South Africa. The adoption of a national policy framework that addresses these issues directly is imperative to ensure the uptake of AI development and deployment for healthcare in a safe, responsible and regulated manner.

COVID-19 exposed flaws in the law regulating the sharing of data and human biological material (HBM). This poses obstacles to the epidemic response, which needs accelerated public health research and, in turn, efficient and legitimate HBM and data sharing. Legal reform and development are needed to ensure that HBM and data are shared efficiently and lawfully. Academics have suggested important legal reforms. The first is the clarification of the susceptibility of HBM and HBM derivatives to ownership, including, inter alia, the promulgation of a revised version of the South African Material Transfer Agreement (SA MTA) by the Minister of Health. This would remove uncertainty regarding the current SA MTA's perpetual donor ownership clause. The second is the development of data trusts, the adoption of open access to research data, and the creation of an African 'data corridor'. This would ensure that data are protected while allowing for the efficient transfer of data between researchers for the collective good and in the interest of the public. The third is the amendment of the Space Affairs Act to extend the powers of the Council of Space Affairs to include the management of data collected through the utilisation of Earth observation and geographical information systems. This would ensure the protection of outer space data, legislating its use and sharing once it lands on Earth. The implementation of these legal reforms and developments will better prepare SA to face future epidemics from a health research perspective.