Investigating Legal Gaps and Ethical Challenges of Xenotransplantation in Iran’s Legal System and International Instruments
Bioethics and Health Law Journal (BHL),
Vol. 6 No. 6 (2026),
11 May 2026
,
Page 1-11
https://doi.org/10.22037/bhl.v6i6.52635
Abstract
Xenotransplantation , as a potential solution to the global shortage of organs for transplantation, represents one of the significant advances in modern medicine. However, this technology raises complex legal and ethical challenges at both national and international levels. This study aims to comparatively examine the legal gaps and ethical challenges associated with xenotransplantation in Iran’s legal system and international instruments. This analytical-descriptive study adopts a comparative approach. Data were collected and analyzed through library-based research, including domestic laws and regulations, authoritative religious rulings, and relevant international instruments, such as reports of the World Health Organization and statements of the International Xenotransplantation Association. The findings reveal that, despite a strong jurisprudential foundation supporting the permissibility of xenotransplantation in Iran, including progressive religious rulings and reliance on the principle of no harm and the principle of self-preservation and treatment, there is a clear legal gap, as no specific legislation or comprehensive regulatory framework governing xenotransplantation currently exists. By contrast, international instruments, including World Health Assembly Resolution WHA57.18 and the Changsha Communiqués, emphasize effective regulatory oversight, infectious-risk assessment, and ethical considerations such as collective consent. Furthermore, shared ethical challenges, including the risk of zoonotic disease transmission, animal welfare and rights, and equitable access to this technology, remain the subject of ongoing debate in the international scientific community. This study highlights the clear discrepancy between the strong jurisprudential and legal support for xenotransplantation and the existing legal gap in Iran. It is therefore imperative that the legislature, drawing upon established international regulatory frameworks while taking into account relevant jurisprudential foundations, undertake the development of comprehensive legislation governing xenotransplantation.
- Xenotransplantation
- Legal Gaps
- Ethical Challenges
- Iranian Legal System
- World Health Organization
- Imami Jurisprudence
How to Cite
References
1. Cooper DK, Ekser B, Tector AJ. A brief history of clinical xenotransplantation. International Journal of Surgery. 2015; 23: 205-210.
2. Li J, Liu K, Jamal MA, Xu K, Cheng W, Jia B, et al. Integrative analysis of swine infectious diseases in the context of xenotransplantation. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2026: 167: 108527.
3. Jalilian M, Izadifard AA, Jahani AA. Jurisprudential-Legal Investigation of the Legitimacy of Transplanting an Organ from a Prohibited Meat Animal to a Human Being. MLJ. 2024; 18(59): 36-55. [Persian]
4. Kazemi A, Mahmoudi S, Ehsandoust N. The legal, ethical, and cultural issues of xenotransplantation in Iran. Bioethics and Health Law Journal. 2022; 2(1): 1-5.
5. Farhadian A. An investigation into the legitimacy of xenotransplantation. JSILJ. 2024; 15(33): 195-212. [Persian]
6. Mohd Zailani MF, Hamdan MN, Mohd Yusof AN. Human-pig chimeric organ in organ transplantation from Islamic bioethics perspectives. Asian Bioethics Review. 2023; 15(2): 181-188.
7. Hawthorne WJ, Pierson RN III, Buhler L, Cowan PJ, Fishman J, Bottino R, et al. International Xenotransplantation Association position paper on the history, current status, and regulation of xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation. 2025; 32(2): e70002.
8. Florencio PS, Caulfield T. Xenotransplantation and public health: identifying the legal issues. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 1999; 90(4): 282-284.
9. Fishman JA, Denner J, Scobie L. International Xenotransplantation Association position paper on infectious disease considerations in xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation. 2025; 32(2): e70001.
10. Kiani M, Abbasi M, Ahmadi M, Salehi B. Organ transplantation in Iran: Current state and challenges with a view on ethical considerations. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2018; 7(3): 45.
11. Rollin BE. Ethical and societal issues occasioned by xenotransplantation. Animals. 2020; 10(9): 1695.
12. Simforoosh N, Basiri A, Fattahi MR, Einollahi B, Firouzan A, Pour-Reza-Gholi F, et al. Living unrelated versus living related kidney transplantation: 20 years’ experience with 2155 cases. Transplantation Proceedings. 2006; 38(2): 422-425.
13. Cozzi E, Tönjes RR, Gianello P, Bühler LH, Rayat GR, Matsumoto S, et al. First update of the International Xenotransplantation Association consensus statement on conditions for undertaking clinical trials of porcine islet products in type 1 diabetes - Chapter 1: update on national regulatory frameworks pertinent to clinical islet xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation. 2016; 23(1): 14-24.
14. Daar AS. Ethics of xenotransplantation: animal issues, consent, and likely transformation of transplant ethics. World Journal of Surgery. 1997; 21(9): 975-982.
15. Hu X, Geng Z, Gonelle-Gispert C, Hawthrone WJ, Deng S, Buhler L. International Human Xenotransplantation Inventory: A 10-year Follow-up. Transplantation. 2022; 106(9): 1713-1716.
16. Fishman JA. Infectious disease risks in xenotransplantation. American Journal of Transplantation. 2018; 18(8): 1857-1864.
17. Caulfield TA, Robertson GB. Xenotransplantation: Consent, public health and charter issues. Medical Law International. 2001; 5(2): 81-99.
- Abstract Viewed: 20 times
- PDF Downloaded: 7 times