نشریه فقه پزشکی
پیاپی 40-41 (پاییز و زمستان 1398)

One of the most important concerns of human is childbearing. Advanced infertility techniques have introduced new approaches to infertile couples. Fetal donation is one of the techniques that have posed major challenges and questions for Islamicscholars. In this study, based on the Imamiyyah jurisprudence, we tryto answer the question whether the parent's relationship with theirfrozen fetus is ownershipor allocation right? Does onlyparents’right to the fetus legitimize its transfer to them?

The present study is based on a descriptive-analytical methodthat has tried to explain and examine the type of relationship between parents andfetus and the extent of their possession of the fetus by analyzing legalandjurisprudential texts.

Although some Western jurists believe that the parents own the fetus and consider them as their property, but it seems that this approach does not prevail in the teachings of Islamic jurisprudence. In Islamic jurisprudence, due toinherent dignity of the fetus, the right to own a fetus is stronger.In this view, all effects of the right to allocate isn’t achieved on the fetus, because the father’s right to the child is an irrevocable right, and in fact being a father is the perfectreason for the realization of the element of guardianship, that is why itsforced and voluntary transfer is prohibited.

Interdiction (Hejr) is one of the topics that jurists and lawyer have long studied its concept and jurisprudential-lega effects. Out-of-controlcomaorcontinuousanesthesiaisoneofthespecializedtopicsofmedicalscience,whichencompassesvariousjurisprudentialandlegalissues.One of the new topics in Islamic jurisprudence is interdictindividualssuffering from out-of-control coma.

This research, which has been done by descriptive-analytical method and with the analysis of legal jurisprudential texts, investigats the status of individuals suffering from an out of control coma interdiction.

The present study shows that people with out of control coma cannot be counted as interdicted people and subject to the support of the legislature of Public interest affairs (omoure Hasbi)law. Asa result, choosing a protecter (Ghayem) for them lacks religious and legal documentation. Therefore, it seems necessary for the legislator to establish a comprehensive protection institution to protect these people by enacting a law.

Studying the jurisprudential chapters on health issues, it can be said that in any case where Islam has placed sanctity and prohibition, a kind of medical support can also be found. One of the health issues for which the ban is intended, is marital relations during menstruation. Medical science has also banned sex during this period because of its damaging and irreparable consequences. In other words, there is an interaction between medical science and the sources of jurisprudence in confirming the disadvantages of such relationship.

This descriptive-analytical study focuses on jurisprudential-medical evidence based on the prohibition of marital relations during menstruation and compares the jurisprudential evidence with the medical findings of this case in order to further clarify the reason for this ruling.

As a result of such research, it can be said that the involvement of men and women, as well as the fetus, in a variety of incurable diseases is one of the risks that can be the result of marital relations during menstruation.In addition to medical science, this issue has also been mentioned in jurisprudence, and narrations have warned people against such relationships.

The rule of bone fracture is oneof the rules related to the bone injuries blood money, which is mentioned as an example in some jurisprudential and narrative texts. This rule was proposed firstly in paragraph (c) of Article 569 of the Islamic Penal Code adopted in 2013. In this paragraph, the legislator considers bone fracture blood money of each organ as Four-fifths of blood money of breaking that organ, while bone breaking in two states,complete recovery and incomplete recovery,hasdifferent blood money. So the question for the authors is whether the bone fracture blood money is different in the case of complete recovery and incomplete recovery?

This research has been done in explaining the legal jurisprudential of the rule of bone fracture, by descriptive analytical method and referring to library sources, and in examining the judicial procedure related to determining the amount of bone fracture blood money, a survey method has been used.

In this paperit is concluded that bone fracture blood moneyis a function of its treatment status and is more compatiblewith jurisprudential and legal principles.The contents of the unanimous vote of No. 1398/09/19-782of the General Assembly of the Supreme Court of the country also confirm this matter.

One of the most important purposes of marriage is to satisfy the couples’ sexual needs. Islamic jurisprudence has long viewed the sexual needs in marriage and its elimination through the lens of rights and duties and meanwhile distinguishing husband from wife, it has considered the sexual rights of both separetly and finally it has intended to the predominant preference of the husband in terms of priority to satisfy sexual needs. The famous opinions of the jurists indicate the application of the husband’s right of sexual enjoyment; however, in the case of the wife, the minimum level of enjoyment is sufficient.Jurisprudential researches either aim to justify this inequality by referring to developmental or gender differences or they try to provide the ground for showing equalityand balance in satisfying this need by creating a restriction on the husband's right to enjoy and inviting him unnecessarily to pay more attention to his wife's needs.

In this analytical and descriptive research, jurisprudential literature ruling the couples’ sexual relationships is carefully read and reviewed in order to clarify the importance of satisfying couples’sexual health and also to what extent it is permissible and possible to enter jurisprudential inferences in couples' sexual relations and to determine its limits.

Based on the results of this study, it can be said that the couples’ sexual rights can be defined only on the basis of sexual satisfaction of both parties in the context of socializing and red lines of the Shari'a, and it may not be appropriate for Islamic jurisprudence to extend the scope of its duties to determining the quantity and quality of sexual merit of a husband and wife.