What drives our IMPACT Fellows? What groundbreaking research are they pursuing, and what personal motivations fuel their journeys? Through this bi-weekly interview series, we look into the minds of our fellows to uncover not just the science but the stories behind their work. Explore their experiences in the IMPACT programme and the unique perspectives they bring to their fields. This week, we had the chance to interview Nishat Hyder-Rahman.
Can you briefly describe your research project and its potential impact on society or the economy?
I am exploring the birth registration of children born using assisted reproductive technologies (ART). My starting point is that traditional approaches to allocating legal parenthood, which are then recorded in the birth registration, do not account for novel family structures enabled via ART. I then look to reforms and adaptations of birth registration – taking examples from around the world – to assess whether these newer models meet the needs of ART families, now and in the foreseeable future. That assessment is based on the objective reality of ART and the family structures it can enable, as well as available testimonies from ART families on how they see themselves. Based on these analyses, I will develop a blueprint legal framework for birth registration, one that reflects the technological and social realities of contemporary family life. My project, and indeed, my research to date, is focused on social impact – specifically, social justice. Underlying this project is the idea that all families should be recognized in law.
Coming from the United Kingdom, what unique perspective do you bring to your field of study at VUB?
The UK boasts a strong history of innovation and advancement in the field of reproductive medicine – the first IVF baby was born in the UK – and the country continues to lead the way in ART. Importantly, alongside scientific progress, the UK has considered the regulation of ART and has a relatively well-developed regulatory framework for ART – that is as important as the innovation itself.
Against that background, Medical Law & Bioethics is quite a well-established sub-discipline within legal scholarship in the UK. I am fortunate to have studied Medical Law & Bioethics with legal scholars and ethicists at the LSE and the University of Manchester who have shaped, and continue to shape, the field. So, I bring that outlook and experience to my work at VUB.
A little more niche perhaps, but also worth mentioning, is that I am trained in the English common law tradition, which is different to the civil law systems that are prevalent across continental Europe, including Belgium. So, I definitely bring a common law comparator perspective to my research and teaching. Since moving to Europe and working in the Netherlands and Belgium, I have learned about how civil law systems operate and I’m gaining a good understanding of how these systems function from the inside. Familiarity with both common law and civil law systems is really helpful for the comparative law work that I often engage in, and for developing a broader view of law and how it operates in different settings. That is also a unique perspective that I now bring to my work.
What’s been the most surprising or valuable aspect of the IMPACT programme for you so far?
The exchanges with my cohort of postdoctoral fellows have been so valuable! Given how diverse our disciplinary backgrounds are, I wasn’t expecting to find much common ground. I have been so pleasantly surprised! The best part of the structured IMPACT programme so far has been the opportunity to connect with colleagues from different faculties and academic backgrounds, whom I’m sure I would not have otherwise met. Fundamental legal research is often a solo pursuit, so it’s nice to progress through the programme with a group of researchers who are in the same position.
If you could instantly become an expert in another field of study, which would you choose and why?
Anthropology. I’m curious about human relationships (social, familial) and kinships. I explore this in one way via family law and via medical law/bioethics, but legal narratives are just one angle on one part of the picture, and I am curious about other angles and other parts of the picture. Furthermore, legal scholarship has historically been heavily doctrinal and desk-based. The emphasis on empirical research methods within anthropology is increasingly appealing to me as offering a different route and framework towards understanding the issues at hand.
Incidentally, Law and Anthropology was a course that was offered at my university, at undergraduate level – I didn’t take it and I regret that now as the disciplines are so complementary! The paths not explored…
Last but not least: What’s your favorite invention of all time?
The printing press! I love reading! Libraries and bookstores are among my favourite places to spend time – all those stories, all those ideas, neatly bound and waiting to be read! Making the written word more accessible, in the way the printing press did, is in my humble opinion, the best invention ever.
Obviously, the internet has further increased access to all types of literature, which is brilliant and so much more convenient. When I started studying law, we still had to go to a physical library to look up law reports and journal articles in hardcopy and either read them there in the library or photocopy them. Now everything is instantly accessible via a few clicks on a computer or device.
Admittedly, I’m not very fond of reading on an e-readers or screen, although I am trying to do so more, for environmental reasons.
(And yes, my house is overrun with books and papers!)