Stephen Marks
Stephen P. Marks is the Dean of the Jindal School of Public Health and Human Development (JSPH) at O. P. Jindal Global University and François-Xavier Bagnoud Professor of Health and Human Rights Emeritus, Harvard University. With degrees in law and international relations from Stanford and several universities in France, as well as the Syrian Arab Republic, he has worked for the United States Senate (Washington, DC), the International Institute of Human Rights (Strasbourg, France), UNESCO (Paris, France), the Ford Foundation (New York), and UN peacekeeping operations (Cambodia, Western Sahara). He has taught at Columbia University and Princeton University before serving as a tenured professor at Harvard from 1999 to 2022. His publications focus on public health, international law, development, biotechnology, mass atrocities, terrorism, cultural rights, tobacco control, access to medicines, human rights education, neuroscience, mental health, and the right to health. He recently co-edited Critical Issues in Human Rights and Development, (Elgar Publisher, 2021).
Phone: +91-8396907250
Address: Professor Stephen P. Marks
Dean, Jindal School of Public Health and Human Development (JSPH)O. P. Jindal Global University
Sonipat Narela Road, Near Jagdishpur Village
Sonipat, Haryana - 131 001, India
Phone: +91-8396907250
Address: Professor Stephen P. Marks
Dean, Jindal School of Public Health and Human Development (JSPH)O. P. Jindal Global University
Sonipat Narela Road, Near Jagdishpur Village
Sonipat, Haryana - 131 001, India
less
InterestsView All (8)
Uploads
Papers by Stephen Marks
considered in terms of bioethics. The Council of Europe and UNESCO
have, however, adopted normative instruments on the human genome,
and one that draws heavily on human rights is under consideration at
the United Nations. This article suggests the need for more thorough
analysis of the underlying assumptions of the references to human rights
in these instruments and of the various possible interpretations of the
human rights affected by developments in biotechnology. The restrictive
approach to genetic manipulation tends to assume the value of protecting
the human genome as it is and acknowledges a welfare function of
the state. The permissive approach, on the other hand, relies more on a
utilitarian calculus of what is good for future generations and a neoliberal
political and economic perspective of what the market will bear.
considered in terms of bioethics. The Council of Europe and UNESCO
have, however, adopted normative instruments on the human genome,
and one that draws heavily on human rights is under consideration at
the United Nations. This article suggests the need for more thorough
analysis of the underlying assumptions of the references to human rights
in these instruments and of the various possible interpretations of the
human rights affected by developments in biotechnology. The restrictive
approach to genetic manipulation tends to assume the value of protecting
the human genome as it is and acknowledges a welfare function of
the state. The permissive approach, on the other hand, relies more on a
utilitarian calculus of what is good for future generations and a neoliberal
political and economic perspective of what the market will bear.