Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2019. Issue 3 (45)


K. M. Khudoley, Perm State University

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ORCID: 0000-0003-1805-0674
ResearcherID: E-3186-2016
Articles of «Scopus» & «Web of Science»:       DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2015-2-29-40
DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2016-34-391-401
DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2017-38-463-473
DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2018-41-371-395

D. M. Khudoley, Perm State University

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ORCID: 0000-0001-5870-1537
ResearcherID: E-3184-2016
Articles of «Scopus» & «Web of Science»:       DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2015-2-18-28
DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2017-37-288-302
DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2018-41-371-395
Requisites: Khudoley K. M., Khudoley D. M. Pravosub"ektnost' soedinennykh (siamskikh) bliznetsov: istoriya i sovremennost' [Legal Personality of Conjoined (Siamese) Twins: History and Modern Times]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Juridicheskie nauki – Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2019. Issue 45. Pp. 442–466. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2019-45-442-466
DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2019-45-442-466


Introduction: the cases when conjoined (Siamese) twins are born are not so rare. However, there has been no univocal approach to the status of such children from the standpoint of legal history. Purpose: various approaches to defining the legal personality of conjoined twins are considered: they may be treated as separate legal entities, as a single personality, and as a complex union of individuals. Methods: the extensive use of the historical method allows us to establish that for a long time birth of conjoined twins was considered a bad omen, such children were looked at as beasts, ‘sprawns of the devil’, so it was not supposed disgraceful  to kill them at birth or exploit such twins making them take part in public performances in defiance of their will. Conjoined twins were traded like any other goods; and even modern times have seen cases of their exploitation and discrimination. Results: currently the legal personality of conjoined twins is characterized by a number of peculiarities. Firstly, they jointly enjoy some constitutional rights and freedoms. Secondly, general provisions of family law on determining paternity/maternity are not applicable to conjoined twins sharing genital organs. In many cases it is impossible to arraign only one of the twins on a criminal charge or hold only one of them administratively liable since there is no possibility to perform some legal proceedings, impose a pre-trial restraint or punishment. Restriction of some rights and freedoms (personal liberty, freedom of movement, the right to labor) of one of conjoined twins would inevitably have an effect on the other, being innocent. Thirdly, the issues of bioethics arising when conjoined twins are separated by surgeons are also given an ambiguous legal assessment, which is still the case even when one of the twins is a parasite. Conclusions: in the light of the ongoing medical advances, increasing the chances of conjoined twins to live, it is getting essential to tackle the issues concerning the determination of their legal personality.

Keywords: conjoined twins; Siamese twins; legal personality; bioethics; enjoyment of the rights and freedoms; prosecution; discrimination; marriage; birth.
  download the full-version article
References: 1. Balakhonov A. V. Oshibki razvitiya [Development Errors]. St. Petersburg, 2001. 288 p. (In Russ.).
2. Vdovina G. V. Bog, angely i siamskie bliznetsy: teologicheskie i antropologicheskie prilozheniya postsrednevekovoy skholasticheskoy psikhologii [God, Angels and Conjoined Twins: Theological and Anthropological Applications of Post-Medieval Scholastic Psychology]. Istoriya filosofii – History of Philosophy. 2018. Vol. 23. Issue 1. Pp. 29–41. (In Russ.).
3. Glashev A.A. Meditsinskoe pravo [Medical Law]. Moscow, 2004. 202 p. (In Russ.).
4. Ishkov Yu. V., Abbyasova Yu. A., Golovina O. E. Ispol'zovanie zapreschennykh metodov issledovaniya i vzyatiya biologicheskogo materiala meditsinskimi rabotnikami natsistkoy Germanii u uznikov kontsentratsionnykh lagerey v period Vtoroy Mirovoy Voyny [Using Forbidden Research Methods and Taking Biological Material from Prisoners of Concentration Camps by Nazi Medical Workers during World War II]. Vestnik Astrakhanskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta – Vestnik of Astrakhan State Technical University. 2017. Issue 2 (64). Pp. 115–122. (In Russ.).
5. Krylova N. E., Pavlova N. N. Kraynyaya neobkhodimost' v meditsinskoy deyatel'nosti: nekotorye voprosy prakticheskogo primeneniya [Emergency in Medical Activity: Some Questions of Practical Application]. Ugolovnoe pravo. 2005. Issue 1. Pp. 41–44. (In Russ.).
6. Musatov E. V., Kolobov A. V. Siamskie bliznetsy – istoriya i sovremennost' [Conjoined Twins: History and the Present]. Meditsina. XXI vek – Medicine. 21st Century. 2008. Issue 12. Pp. 36–45. (In Russ.).
7. Starovoytova O.E., Starovoytov V.N. Yuridicheskoe opredelenie suschnosti cheloveka [Legal Definition of the Essence of the Person]. Yuridicheskiy mir – Juridical World. 2008. Issue 8. Pp. 73–75. (In Russ.).
8. Chenskaya M. S. Ugolovno-pravovaya otsenka deyaniy, sovershennykh v usloviyakh krayney neobkhodimosti i obosnovannogo riska, v Anglii i Uel'se [Necessity and Justifiable Risk in Criminal Law in England and Wales]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 11: Pravo – The Moscow University Herald. Series 11. Law. 2016. Issue 1. Pp. 129–139. (In Russ.).
9. Barlian M. Head-Counting vs. Heart-Counting: An Examination of the Recent Case of the Conjoined Twins from Malta. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. 2002. Vol. 45. Issue 4. Pp. 593–603. (In Eng.).
10. Bates A.W. Conjoined Twins in the 16th Century. Twin Research. 2002. Vol. 5. Issue 6. Pp. 521–528. (In Eng.).
11. Blickstein I. The Conjoined Twins of Lowen. Twin Research. 2000. Vol. 3. Issue 4. Pp. 185–188. (In Eng.).
12. Bondeson J. The Two-Headed Boy, and Other Medical Marvels. New York, Cornell University Press, 2000. 295 p. (In Eng.).
13. Bondeson J. The Biddenden Maids: a Curious Chapter in the History of Conjoined Twins. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 1992. Vol. 85. Issue 4. Pp. 217–221. (In Eng.).
14. Bondeson J. Dicephalus Conjoined Twins: A Historical Review With Emphasis on Viability. Journal of Pediatric Surgery. 2001. Vol. 36. Issue 9. Pp. 1435–1444. (In Eng.).
15. Calagan J. L. The Conjoined Twins Born near Worms, 1495. Journal of the History of the Medicine. 1983. Vol. 38. Pp. 450–451. (In Eng.).
16. Campbell A. Contestable Bodies: Law, Medicine, and the Case of Conjoined Twins. Ontario, 2003. 123 p. (In Eng.).
17. Caskey K. Clothing Design for Conjoined Twins. Iowa State University, Digital Repository, 2013. Pp. 8–9. (In Eng.).
18. Christie G.C. The Defense of Necessity Considered from the Legal and Moral Points of View. Duke Law Journal. 1999. Vol. 48. Issue 5. Pp. 975–1042. DOI: 10.2307/1373089. (In Eng.).
19. Davis C. Complicity, Crime and Conjoined Twins. Alternative Law Journal. 2017. Vol. 42. Issue 1. Pp. 18–23. (In Eng.).
20. Davis. C. Criminal Law Implications for Doctors Who Perform Sacrificial Separation Surgery on Conjoined Twins in England and Australia. Victoria University Law and Justice Journal. 2014. Vol. 4. Issue 1. Pp. 61–76. (In Eng.).
21. Davis. C. Conjoined Twins as Persons that Can Be Victims of Homicide. Medical Law Review. 2011. Vol. 19. Issue 3. Pp. 430–466. (In Eng.).
22. Dumont M. La Gyn´ecologie et l'Obstet¬rique dans la Bible. Journal de Gynéco-logie Obstét¬rique et Biologie de la Repro-duction. 1990. Vol. 19. Issue 2. Pp. 145–153. (In Fr.)
23. El-Gohary M. A. Siamese Twins in the United Arab Emirates. Pediatric Surgery International. 1998. Vol. 13. Issue 2–3. Pp. 154–157. (In Eng.).
24. Flannery E. J. One Advocate's Viewpoint: Conflict and Tensions in the Baby K. Case. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics (American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics). 1995. Vol. 23. Issue 1. Pp. 7–12. (In Eng.).
25. Harris J. Human Beings, Persons and Conjoined Twins: An Ethical Analysis of the Judgment in Re A. Medical Law Review. 2001. Vol. 9. Pp. 221–223. (In Eng.).
26. Hewson B. Killing off Mary: Was the Court of Appeal Right? Medical Law Review. 2001. Vol. 9. Issue 3. Pp. 281–298. DOI: 10.1093/medlaw/9.3.281. (In Eng.).
27. Jimenez F. A. The First Autopsy in the New World. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine. 1978. Vol. 54. Pp. 618–619. (In Eng.).
28. Keene A. T. Hilton, Daisy (05 February 1908?–04 January 1969), Conjoined Twins and Entertainers. American National Biography Online. Oxford University Press, 2005. Available at: ar¬ticle.2001878. (In Eng.).
29. Kennedy G. E. The 3,000-Year History of Сonjoined Twins. Western Journal of Medicine. 2001. Vol. 175. Issue 3. Pp. 176–177. (In Eng.).
30. Merkel R. An den Grenzen von Medizin, Ethik und Strafrecht: Die Сhirurgische Trennung Sogenannter Siamesischer Zwillinge. Medizinstrafrecht. 2 Auf. Richard Boorberg Verlag. 2001. Pp. 145–174. (In Germ.).
31. Pare A. Of Monsters and Prodigies. (English translation by Johnson T. London, Cotes & Young). 1983. 66 p. (In Eng.).
32. Paris J. J., Elias-Jones A. C. 'Do We Murder Mary to Save Jodie?' An Ethical Analysis of the Separation of the Manchester Conjoined Twins. Postgraduate Medical Journal. 2001. Vol. 77. Issue 911. Pp. 593–598. (In Eng.).
33. Rochadi. Parapagus Dicephalus Conjoined Twins and Evaluation of Ischiopagus Tetrapus Conjoined Twins in Indonesia: a Case Report. Journal of the Medical Sciences (Berkala Ilmu Kedokteran). 2013. Vol. 45. Issue 3. Pp. 146–150. (In Eng.).
34. Sarat A. Merciful Judgments and Contemporary Society. Cambridge University Press, 2012. 309 p. (In Eng.).
35. Spencer R. Conjoined Twins: Develop-mental Malformations and Clinical Implications. Bal¬timore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003. 476 p. (In Eng.).
36. The City of God. Translation by Gerald G. Walsh, S. J., et al. Introduction by Étienne Gilson. New York: Doubleday, Image Books, 1958. 976 p. (In Eng.).
37. Ibn Kathir. The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya). Vol. 1; transl. by Trevor Le Gassick; reviewed by Ahmed Fareed. Series: The Great Books of Islamic Civilization. Garnet Publishing, 1998. 860 p. (In Eng.).
38. Van der Weiden R. Two Early Case Reports on Conjoined Twins. Twin Research. 1999. Vol. 2. Issue 1. Pp. 30–32. (In Eng.).
39. Thijssen J. M. Twins as Monsters: Albertus Magnus's Theory of the Generation of Twins and its Philosophical Context. Bulletin of the History of Medicine. 1987. Vol. 61. Pp. 237–246. (In Eng.).
40. Van der Weiden R. M. The First Successful Separation of Conjoined Twins (1689). Twin Research. 2004. Vol. 7. Issue 2. Pp. 125–127. (In Eng.).
41. Watt H. Conjoined Twins: Separation as Mutilation Journal. Medical Law Review. 2001. Vol. 9. Issue 3. Pp. 237–245. (In Eng.).
42. Wenkel D. Separation of Conjoined Twins and the Principle of Double Effect. Christian Bioethics. 2006. Vol. 12. Issue 3. Pp. 291–300. (In Eng.).

Received: 01.02.2019
Financing: ---




The Perm State University
614990, Perm, street Bukireva, 15
+7 (342) 2 396 275
ISSN 1995-4190 ISSN (eng.) 2618-8104
ISSN (online) 2658-7106
DOI 10.17072/1995-4190
(с) Editorial board, 2010
The magazine is registered in Federal Agency of supervision in sphere of communication and mass communications.
The certificate on registration of mass media ПИ № ФС77-33087 from September, 5th, 2008
The certificate on reregistration of mass media ПИ № ФС77-53189 from Marth, 14th, 2013

The magazine is included in List ВАК and in the Russian index of scientific citing

The founder & Publisher: the State educational institution of the higher training
“The Perm State University”.
Publishing 4 times a year