How is it possible to defend on one hand the people free choice to no give birth to disabled foetus and, on the other hand, defend disabled people reproduction right as well as their freedom to plan a family?
The question of balance of rights is a very interesting one and is being discussed by the disability movement. There is no clear position on this issue yet. However, it is clear that many people’s decision not to have a disabled baby is driven by misconceptions about disabilities, biased information given by medical personnel and lack of public support for raising a disabled child.
Among the indications contained in the document you proposed, it’s possible to read guidelines specifically dedicated to European states. How these states can be vigilant in order to avoid forced sterilization?
In the present case, the women were sterilised because they had intellectual disabilities. This would not have happened if they were not disabled. Further, despite the fact that the procedure was illegal under the French law at the time, no criminal investigation was launched. Again, this is something that would have unlikely been the case if the victims had no disabilities. So the prerequisite of all other measures is combating discrimination and prejudice against persons with disabilities as weak and vulnerable human beings who are unfit to be parents.
Secondly, as we can see from this case, having good legislation doesn’t always protect the citizens. Enforcing it in an adequate way is very important. Prevention and punishment of the crime of forced sterilisation are equally important.
Thirdly, in this case the women were invisible in the domestic proceedings since they are deprived of their legal capacity. They were not entitled to defend their rights or even be party to the proceedings. This is against the international law in force, including the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (ratified by France and the 19 other EU Member States). People with disabilities must be recognised as persons before law and exercise their full legal capacity on an equal basis with others.
A point from where it is not possible to prescind is the so-called “informed consent” which regards any kind of medical treatment. Which strategies can be put in place in order to let disabled people be conscious and informed?
Very often, the inability to establish communication with a person with a disability is confused with inability of the person with a disability to communicate. We must depart from the presumption that the majority of persons can communicate their wishes and preferences. However, the personnel working with the persons with disabilities need urgent training in methods of communication (including non-verbal communication and easy-to-understand communication).
The consent is only considered as informed if the person understands the information they are provided with and the consequences of the decision they are about to take. That is why the information must be accessible and understandable. This is particularly critical to the life-altering procedure of sterilisation which seriously impacts upon the individual’s human rights.
(The answers were collected in a written form)
On the inside: