Dr hab. ANETTA BRECZKO – profesor Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku. Pracuje na Wydziale Prawa w Katedrze Teorii Prawa i Filozofii Prawa. Jest kierownikiem Zakładu Filozofii Prawa i Etyki Prawa. Specjalistka w zakresie szeroko rozumianej filozofii i teorii prawa, a także etycznych oraz prawnych implikacji biologii i medycyny (bioetyki). Autorka dwóch monografii: Podmiotowość prawna człowieka w warunkach postępu biotechnomedycznego (2011), Prawo i moralność. W teorii i praktyce. Wczoraj i dziś. Zarys wykładu (2004) oraz autorka i współautorka ponad pięćdziesięciu publikacji naukowych, w tym kilku podręczników akademickich.
EN
Artificial procreation and reproductive genetics have become a reality in which, thanks to the tools of contemporary medicine, all sorts of interference into human organism are possible. Man has become to create himself. In this context, it is vital to take into account positive law regulations because of the variety of standpoints and differences in defining the core of natural law. Undoubtedly, religious aspect has to be part of bioethical discussions, because for many people religion is a source of moral behaviour. However, we have to remember that public and private sphere of ethics are two different aspects which should not be mingled in a democratic state. Bioethical discussions have resulted in international regulations, for example bans on reproductive cloning of humans, eugenic practices aiming at selecting people, therapies resulting in changes within the human genome, commercialization of a human body, etc. Polish legislators are facing a difficult problem to determine a detailed legal framework of artificial procreation and reproductive genetics to meet not only the European standards of the Bioethical Convention, but also cultural determinants and expectations of the society.
The article deals with the legal implications of multiculturalism, in the context of globalization and the “clash of civilizations”. From a European-democratic perspective, we analyze several practical dilemmas – the consequence of a “collision” between diverse normative systems: their respective standards, views of morality, religion, costumes, among others. Confronting many different and, sometimes, competing values – inevitable in pluralistic societies – represents a huge challenge for government authorities and, particularly, lawmakers. The idea of multiculturalism which, until now, has been an inherent element of European legal systems, nowadays faces a serious crisis. In this context, there is an urgent need to implement appropriate policies and laws able to protect diverse cultural groups and to ensure efficient instruments, in order to eliminate the unwanted effects of multiculturalism, such as extremism and terrorism.
The discussion about elites is part of a cumbersome and long debate. In the context of a globalized world, the task becomes even more complex to understand. It is because national borders no longer define or, at least, do not define completely, all the loyalties and actions of powerful groups. Meanwhile, the transnational space opens new fields of activity and, along with, gives them new opportunities. In first place, this paper aims to understand the very meaning of a power elite: its significance and its possible implications for some selected economic and historical processes. Secondly, since the elites are largely defined by their social environment, the present paper seeks to understand the particularity of the American case. Finally, we try to explain how this ruling class influenced the consolidation of the United States as the leading world power, participating in the creation of a specific international system, based on institutions and the global regulation.
Pomoc społeczna jest instytucją życia społecznego, której prawidłowe funkcjonowanie determinują nie tylko ramy obowiązującego prawa, ale również normy różnych systemów pozaprawnych (głównie systemu moralnego). Celem niniejszego artykułu stała się analiza pojęcia „pomocy społecznej” w kontekście godności oraz autonomii osoby bezdomnej, zarówno z perspektywy aksjologicznej, jak i prawnej. W opracowaniu zastosowano w szczególności metodę dogmatyczną. Perspektywa filozoficzna ukazuje, że pojęcie „pomocy” jest wieloznaczne i nie zawsze wiąże się z pozytywnym ładunkiem aksjologicznym. W ujęciu prawnym fundamentalnymi przesłankami „dobrego administrowania” oraz faktycznego zapewnienia bezpieczeństwa socjalnego osobom potrzebującym (w tym bezdomnym) są: godność osobowa i godność osobista, powiązane z koniecznością respektowania autonomii człowieka. Prawo pomocy społecznej, które nie uwzględnia tych wartości, nie może być ocenione jako „dobre”.
EN
Social assistance is an institution of social life, whose proper functioning is determined not only by law enforcement, but also by norms belonging to diverse non-legal systems (especially the moral system). The purpose of this paper is to analyze the concept of „social assistance” in the context of the dignity and autonomy of the homeless, considered both from the axiological and legal point of view. In this regard, we use the dogmatic method. The philosophical perspective shows that the notion of „assistance” is ambiguous and does not always entail a positive axiological charge. From the legal approach, the basic premises of „good administration” and the actual provision of social welfare to those in need (including the homeless) are: personal and individual dignity, related to the obligation to respect human autonomy. Social assistance that does not take these values into account cannot be considered as a „good practice”.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.