Blockchain Papers

Liseli Akayombokwa

No abstract is available for this record.

Fourth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction, Aleksandr P. Zhukov

The phenomenon of cryptocurrency is currently of significant relevance to European countries. Currently, they have become a familiar means of payment, a tool of virtual life, and property. At the same time, in many Euro-pean countries, the legislative regulation of cryptocurrencies is at the initial stage of its development. Numerous countries have transitioned from a phase of rejection to actively implementing legal frameworks that govern the circulation, application, and even inheritance of crypto-assets. Nevertheless, several obstacles impede the real-ization of this process. This article presents an overview of the specific positioning of cryptocurrencies as ob-jects of civil law, exemplified by the legal doctrine of Germany. It analyzes the challenges associated with the classification of cryptocurrencies as part of property. Furthermore, the article examines the current situation, characteristics, and issues surrounding the legislative inheritance of cryptocurrencies in several European countries.

Amy Held, Alisdair MacPherson, Burcu Yüksel Ripley

No abstract is available for this record.

Lodovico Parmegiani, A. Arnone, Silvia Bernardi, Walter Ciampaglia · 7 authors

Abstract Study question To date, no publications exist describing Blockchain in IVF (Hickman, 2020). Can Blockchain technology be used for traceability and accountability in IVF laboratory procedures? Summary answer Blockchain is an easy-to-implement technology for incorruptible traceability of a “Virus-Free” vitrification/warming procedure. What is known already In healthcare, Blockchain can become a tool to address challenges regarding sensitive data-sharing and traceability of medical and laboratory procedures. During the Covid-19 pandemic, many authors warned about the role of LN2 as a potential vector for virus contamination, and vitrification and warming were identified as critical procedures for risk of contamination for environments, surfaces, operators and cells. In this study we describe the first application of Blockchain in IVF for incorruptible traceability of a “Virus-Free” vitrification/warming procedure based on the combined use of UVC-Sterilized Liquid Nitrogen (LN2) and CE Medical Devices (CE-MD). Study design, size, duration Report on 2346 Ethereum Blockchain data transactions for IVF laboratory procedures mined from 01/10/2019 to 31/12/2021. The procedures were oocyte/embryo vitrification, warming or handling in LN2 after cryopreservation. For each vitrification, warming and handling a UVC-sterilized batch of LN2 was associated with the code assigned to the vitrification/warming procedure and with the lot number of the single-use sterile vitrification box (N-Sleeve). The clinical results obtained from warmed oocytes/embryos were observed as completion of this process. Participants/materials, setting, methods A Blockchain trusted “Virus-Free” vitrification/warming programme was set up using a specifically designed CE-MD N-Bath-System (Nterilizer-Italy). Each procedure was traced by the CE-MD’s software and a dedicated web application. Finally, data were made incorruptible by Ethereum Blockchain transactions. Before oocyte/embryo warming, vitrification carrier washing with UVC-sterilized LN2 was performed in accordance with Parmegiani et al (2012) and recent international anti-Covid guidelines. Main results and the role of chance Of the 2346 Blockchain transactions 1268 regarded vitrification and cryopreserved specimen handling procedures; 1078 transactions were frozen cell warmings (308 oocytes and 770 embryos) performed on 799 patients. To date, 445 pregnancies have been obtained (pregnancy rate: 41% per cycle; 56% per patient) and 219 babies have been born. Limitations, reasons for caution Ethereum is a decentralized, open-source blockchain with smart contract functionality. Ether is the native cryptocurrency which is highly susceptible to cost changes. Other public or private Blockchains may be used in future in healthcare with more stable transaction costs. Wider implications of the findings This is the first evidence of the application of Blockchain in IVF and many others will probably follow. Blockchain immutable records of LN2 sterilization combined with procedure codes and disposable lots represent incorruptible traces for “Virus-Free” vitrification/warming. During this pandemic 219 babies were born from cryopreservation procedures powered by Blockchain. Trial registration number Not Applicable

Caline Hou

Equitable distribution is the process of dividing marital property fairly upon divorce.The confusion surrounding the categorization of Bitcoin, a type of virtual currency that can be obtained and transferred anonymously, frustrates courts' ability to properly value divorcing parties' assets and determine a fair distribution of marital property.This Recent Development argues that North Carolina should clearly define Bitcoin as a security.First, a clear categorization of Bitcoin will notify parties that Bitcoin is a reportable asset for equitable distribution proceedings.Second, recognizing Bitcoin as a security may subject Bitcoin to increased securities regulations.Increased regulation allows for better reporting of Bitcoin transactions, which will help courts and divorcing parties discover and value bitcoins.Courts that correctly understand the value of each party's assets will be better able to determine a truly equitable distribution of property.

Josh Gupta‐Kagan

Millions of American children are raised primarily by people other than their parents, mostly by grandparents and other kin, and millions more are raised by third parties for some period of their childhood. In most such situations, informal arrangements negotiated by family members and kinship networks effectively provide care for these children. Many cases, however, require some formal legal arrangement; third party custody orders are needed to obtain necessary services and benefits for children whose parents are absent, and to protect children in the rare but still significant instances in which a parent is abusive or neglectful.\nStates currently have widely varying means of adjudicating child custody disputes between parents and third parties. One Supreme Court case, Troxel v. Granville, addresses contests between parents and third parties. While Troxel ruled for the parent in that particular case, it neither represents a strong parents’ rights opinion nor does it provide states with clear guidance on how to shape third party custody statutes. This Article argues that states should enact child custody statutes according to three primary points. First, due to the wide range of situations in which a third party custody order may be necessary, states should permit a broad set of individuals to seek custody. Concerns that broad standing provisions would lead to a flood of meritless lawsuits are not borne out by actual data in states that have had nearly unlimited standing. Second, recognizing the constitutional primacy of the parent-child relationship, states should hold third parties to a high substantive standard, and require them to prove that parental custody would harm the child in some way. Any lesser standard — such as the best interests of the child standard applied in some states — insufficiently protects relationships between parents and children. Third, recognizing that the core parental right of the “care, custody and control” of a child is at stake, states should generally hold third parties to a clear and convincing burden of proof. Most states apply a preponderance burden or have not specified a burden. One exception should apply: When a third party has acted as a parent for a significant time and a child’s birth parent has not done so, then that parent’s constitutional rights are diminished, society’s interest in maintaining the long-term bond between the child and third party is enhanced, and a lower burden of proof should apply.

Ellen Waldman, Marybeth Herald

In his decade-long exploration of female sexuality, Sigmund Freud professed to be on a mission to answer the elusive question: What do women want? Unfortunately, the 19th-century psychiatrist was unable to separate that question from the one he ultimately answered: What do men want women to want? In some sense, Freud's inquiries provide an apt metaphor for the medical profession's stance toward female experience. When confronted with the difference presented by the female body as well as women's unique life experiences, the medical field has responded with approaches that range from bemusement to hostility to intense indifference. Although the pernicious effect of gender bias on healthcare delivery is well-known, less attention has been paid to its secondary effects. Disinterest in or hostility to the female experience leads to an informational vacuum that allows for the development of ideas, theories, and assumptions founded on cognitive bias, rationalization, and wishful thinking rather than empirically-based knowledge. These biases, then, are imported into the legal field where they undergird juridical movements that serve to disadvantage women. This essay explores how, in the medical context, the stunted development of knowledge about women, becomes, in the legal context, a dangerous thing. In examining the interplay between medical and social science information and legal dogma, this essay will discuss how bodies of knowledge are selectively pursued, exploited, or ignored in the service of patriarchal assumptions that achieve expression in legal responses to emerging social dilemmas. Selective information flows between the medical and legal professions result in untoward consequences in a wide variety of settings. Here, we limit our focus to two such untoward consequences. The first part of the essay discusses the impoverished medical discourse on female sexuality and how inattention to female sexual fulfillment has led to legal rules that disproportionately affect women's expression as sexual beings. The second part examines available social science data detailing the distinction between psychological and genetic parenthood and shows how that data has been ignored in favor of judicial presumptions that privilege men and disadvantage women in disputes over frozen embryos. A close look at these contested arenas of sexuality and reproduction demonstrates the difficulty of charting women's progress toward equality. On the surface, in both law and medicine, norms of gender equity command facial allegiance. Medicine disavows its earlier efforts to exclude women from the profession, while law proffers the equal protection doctrine as proof that sexist behavior can be rooted out in a zero-tolerance legal culture. Under the waterline, though, unconscious beliefs and stereotypes hold sway. These unruly currents lead to rationalizations and cognitive errors that elude rigorous examination, but affect women at work, at home, and in the bedroom.