posted on 2024-11-16, 01:41authored byLinda Steele
Since at least the early 1990s, disability rights advocates have argued for the prohibition of sterilisation of women and girls with disability without their consent ('non-consensual sterilisation') except in that small proportion of instances where there is a serious threat to life. In part, this argument has been framed in terms of human rights: the act of non-consensual sterilisation (except where there is a serious threat to life) is fundamentally an act of discrimination and violence which violates multiple human rights including the rights to equality and non-discrimination, freedom from torture and personal integrity. In recent years these arguments have been increasingly supported by international human rights bodies which have framed non-consensual sterilisation of women and girls with disability as a violation of human rights and urged states parties, including Australia, to prohibit the practice.
History
Citation
L. Steele, 'Court authorised sterilisation and human rights: inequality, discrimination and violence against women and girls with disability' (2016) 39 (3) University of New South Wales Law Journal 1002-1037.
Journal title
UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL
Volume
39
Issue
3
Pagination
1002-1037
Language
English
Notes
Permission granted from University of New South Wales Law Journal to post published version.