From the Right to Life to the Right to Livability: Radically Re-approaching ‘Life’ in Human Rights Politics

This article critically reflects on current mainstream debate on abortion in international human rights discourse and the conception of life underpinning it. The public health focus on access to safe abortion which has dominated this discourse can be detected as committed to a fundamentally liberal idea of bounded and individual subjecthood which mirrors the commitments of the liberal right to life more generally. However, feminist challenges to this frame seeking to advance wider access to reproductive freedoms appear equally underpinned by a liberal conception of life. It is asserted that feminists may offer a more radical challenge to the current impasse in international debate on abortion by engaging with the concept of livability which foregrounds life as an interdependent and conditioned process. The trope of the ‘right to livability’ developed in this article presents a means to reposition the relation between rights and life and facilitate such radical engagement which better attends to the socio-political conditions shaping our interdependent living and being.

Delimitation of the Right to Life by Healthcare Professionals: Up to what point should the right to life be protected?

This article explores the medical care standard required by law for terminally illpatients and the possibility of limiting therapeutic efforts while respecting the duediligence expected from doctors. To this end, circumstances are identified in whichthe doctor is forced to choose between two possible actions: to guarantee the right tolife by continuing treatment, or to limit the right to healthcare by limiting therapeuticefforts. Two cases taken from English Common Law were reviewed that decided onthe factual problem at hand. In our country, the Constitutional Court established aline of jurisprudence on the role of the doctor in deciding whether or not to continuetreatment for a terminally ill person. Lastly, jurisprudence precedents are presentedalong with a comparative analysis of the solutions given in Great Britain andin Colombia.

Global Acceleration and Dispossesion: Regression in the Right to Life and Public Health during Ecuador’s Neoliberal Decades

The present essay’s central argument or hypothesis is, consequently, that the mechanisms accelerating a wealth concentrating and exclusionary economy centred on the benefit and overprotection of big business—with a corresponding plundering of resources that are vital for life—generated forms of loss and regression in the right to healthcare and the dismantling of institutional protections. These are all expressed in indicators from 1990-2005, which point not only to the deterioration of healthcare programs and services but also to the undermining of the general conditions of life (social reproduction) and, in contrast to the reports and predictions of the era’s governments, a stagnation or deterioration in health indicators, especially for those most sensitive to the crisis. The present study’s argument is linked together across distinct chapters. First, we undertake the necessary clarification of the categories central to the understanding of a complex issue; clarifying the concept of health itself and its determinants, emphasizing the necessity of taking on an integral understanding as a fundamental prerequisite to unravelling what documents and reports from this era either leave unsaid or distort. Based on that analysis, we will explain the harmful effects of global economic acceleration, the monopolization and pillaging of strategic healthcare goods; not only those which directly place obstacles on the access to health services, but also those like the destructuration of small economies, linked to the impoverishment and worsening of living modes. Thinking epidemiologically, we intend to show signs of the deterioration of broad collectivities’ ways of life as a result of the mechanisms of acceleration and pillage. We will then collect disparate evidence of the deterioration of human health and ecosystems to, finally, establish the most urgent conclusions about this unfortunate period of our social and medical history.

Anti-choice "Right to Life" conference

General note: Title and date provided by Bettye Lane.

Anti-choice "Right to Life" at St. Patrick's Cathedral

General note: Title and date provided by Bettye Lane.

Anti-choice "Right to Life" at St. Patrick's Cathedral

General note: Title and date provided by Bettye Lane.

The right to be green: using human rights law to achieve environmental protection

The relationship between the environment and human rights has long been recognised. It is now largely accepted that a ‘good’ environment is a necessary precondition for the enjoyment of a wide range of human rights, including the right to health, the right to an adequate standard of living, and even the right to life. It has even been suggested that as humans we all possess a right to live in an environment of a certain standard, based on the intrinsic value of the natural world to all human beings. In this context much has been written regarding the important role that the environment plays in human lives. This paper looks at the flip-side of this discussion, and examines what human rights can do for the environment. It is argued that, while there are valid criticisms for linking environmental protection too strongly to human needs, there is nonetheless much to be gained from using human rights law as a framework to achieve environmental protection.

The Right to Water in the Case-Law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

The human right to water is nowadays more broadly recognised, mainly due to the essential societal function that this resource plays; likewise, because of the present water scarcity is generating conflicts between its different uses. Thus, this right aims at protecting human beings by guaranteeing access to clean water that is essential to satisfy vital human needs. Similarly, access to clean water is an important element to guarantee other rights including the right to life and health. The recognition of the right to water is mainly achieved in two ways: as a new and independent right and as a subordinate or derivative right. Concerning the latter, the right to water can emanate from civil and political rights, such as the right to life; or can be derived from economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to health, the right to an adequate standard of living, and the right to housing. This contribution explores the position of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding the right to water, and analyses whether the Court has recognised the right to water and, if so, in which manner.

Nicklinson v Ministry of Justice [2012] 304 (QB) : further UK developments regarding a person's right to choose when and how to die : assisted termination of life

UK High Court decision - application for declarations legitimising third party assistance in voluntary termination of life - facts - moral, social and ethical issues - analysis.

Reconsidering Resource Rights: The Case for a Basic Right to the Benefits of Life-Sustaining Ecosystem Services

In the presence of anthropogenic climate change, gross environmental degradation, and mass abject poverty, many political theorists currently debate issues such as people's right to water, the right to food, and the distribution of rights to natural resources more generally. However, thus far many theorists either focus (somewhat arbitrarily) only on one particular resource (e.g. water) or they treat all natural resources alike, meaning that many relevant distinctions within the group of natural resources are overlooked. Hence, the paper will start with an analysis of the various forms which natural resources can take and how this might influence one's conception of resource rights. In so doing, the paper argues that we have to carefully distinguish between the actual physical resources people might control and how we distribute these, and the life-sustaining benefits each and every person draws from sustainable and functioning ecosystems. Based on this distinction, the paper will argue for a right to the benefits of life-sustaining ecosystem services as a universal basic right every person has. Further distributive claims with respect to particular physical resources would thus be limited by the requirements of such a basic right.

Evolving citizenship : "the right to protest and the right to dance"

Citizenship is a term of association among strangers. Access to it involves contested identities and symbolic meanings, differing power relations and strategies of inclusion, exclusion and action, and unequal room for maneuver or productivity in the uses of citizenship for any given group or individual. In the context of "rethinking communication," strenuous action is neede to associate such different life chances in a common enterprise at a national level or, more modestly, simply to claim equivalence for all such groups under the rule of one law.