Currently, given the importance of the family and introduction new methods of fertility assistance, conflict of couples’ rights especially in the field of reproduction and health has become significant. One of these cases is conflict of husband’s right to reproduce with wife’s right to health. So the main question in this study is that how do we solve this trouble by suitable methods and help the couples to get their own right? The research method is descriptive - analytical approach and data has been collected by studying the related references. The results show that in many cases wife’s right to health is prior to the husband's right to reproductive. Because wife’s right to health is the precedence right and related to life. Moreover according to the principle of no harm, the husband must not harm his wife for getting own right. At the end, according to the principle of agreement, the husband can remarried or essentially give up this own right.

Introduction: Arbitration has a contractual nature and is subject to the sovereignty of the will of the parties, but in some cases, the legislator imposed the referral of claims to arbitration on the will of the parties and caused the contractual nature of the arbitration clause to disappear or be limited. By doing this, he has placed the arbitration outside the will of the parties. This issue causes some moral conflicts in the discussion of compulsory arbitration. Therefore, this research has been done with the purpose of examining the position of compulsory arbitration in Iran's legal system and the ethical challenges in it with a descriptive-analytical approach. Material and Methods: The research was a review method, in order to achieve the goal of the research, in addition to electronic education books and virtual education in this field, articles related to the research keywords from 2004 to 2022 from the databases of Civilica, Magiran, Sid, Researchgate, Science direct, was reviewed Conclusion: Based on the findings of the research, it can be concluded that compulsory arbitration in Iran has ethical challenges in the field of implementation and interpretation, the most important of which is the issue of the right to action and judicial justice. In the context of ambiguities in mandatory arbitration, even if the method of arbitration becomes ambiguous, the arbitrator has the duty to find out the will of the legislator with the principles and rules of interpretation, which creates a moral conflict for the arbitrator.

Despite marked improvements in the health index in recent years, the right to health of millions of people is under increasing threat. The right to health is everyone's right to enjoy the highest attainable physical and mental health standards. It is closely linked to the realization of other human rights. The right to health encompasses access not only to health services but also to economic stability, quality education, employment, housing, suitable living facilities, and other aspects that contribute to health. To overcome these challenges, the theme of World Health Day 2024 has been selected as "My Health, My Right." This year's theme was selected to champion the right of everyone, everywhere, to have access to quality health services, education, and information, as well as healthy drinking water, clean air, good nutrition, quality housing, good working and environmental conditions.

The "Legal language" has provided a strong supportive argument for right to health advocacy. In such a way that, human rights rules has been established as the most important globalized political value at the heart of the theory and practice of public health discourse. Its power of enforceability guaranties fair distribution of health resources in each country. At the same time, the right to health, the “ Right-claim” which has been identified by international and national documents requires preconditions that will not come true without the proper cultural, social, economic, and political infrastructures, in general the factors shaping the "context of people's lives” . In other words, a legal reasoning for right to health can be followed by an argument for the right to health determinants. Therefore, by adopting an epistemological approach, this paper presents a legal narrative of “ governance for health” . This paper creates a new perspective on the "right to health" debates. Additionally, it provides powerful arguments that health policy should be based on a perception of factors with major impacts on the people health and what have being described as "health hazard", "health protector", and "health promoter". However, this claim for right to health as an "individual enforceable right" is criticized, and there may be theoretical and practical obstacles to the full realization of this human right.