Issues in Human Rights Protection of Intellectually Disabled Persons

Dimopoulos, Andreas

doi:10.4324/9781315590189

Cited by 10 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically in relation to sterilization, a person (even an individual without capacity) has an absolute right to veto being sterilized (Dimopoulos, 2010). Even for those requesting sterilization of their own free will, conditions that must be met are a grave/imminent risk of pregnancy, that such a pregnancy would endanger the life of that person and that pregnancy cannot be prevented by less restrictive means.…”

Section: More Recent Policy Approaches In Three Countries: the Unitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Valid grounds would be confined to (Dimopoulos, 2010): avoidance of grave and imminent harm from conception/pregnancy, sexually active people, those in whom a less-restrictive option (reversible contraception) is not suitable and those who have undergone sexual training but it has failed. …”

Section: Modern Approaches To Judging Sterilization Requestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Mental Capacity Act 2005 has, however, been criticized because of its lack of human rights considerations; also because its best interests approach is paternalistic (Dimopoulos, 2010). The Mental Capacity Act gives no right of the incapacitated to be heard; their voice is consulted only if it is practicable to do so.…”

Section: The United Kingdommentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Sterilization of those with intellectual disability: Evolution from non-consensual interventions to strict safeguards

Rowlands

Amy

2017

J Intellect Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-consensual sterilisation is one of the characteristic historical abuses that took place mainly in the first half of the 20 th -century. People with intellectual disability were a prime target as part of the ideology of negative eugenics. In certain jurisdictions, laws were in force for several decades that permitted sterilisation without the need for consent, or with consent from third parties. The long-term adverse effects on those sterilised against their will have only more recently been recognised. In the latter half of the 20 th -century, human rights treaties were introduced and developed; they have in the main curbed sterilisation abuses. Courts have developed more stringent criteria for making decisions on applications for sterilisation and nowadays there are mostly adequate safeguards in place to protect those with intellectual disability from non-consensual sterilisation, except when it is overwhelmingly the right decision for an individual, taking into account all the medical and social factors of a particular case. Word count6,795 words 3

show abstract

Section: More Recent Policy Approaches In Three Countries: the Unitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modern Approaches To Judging Sterilization Requestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sterilization of those with intellectual disability: Evolution from non-consensual interventions to strict safeguards

Rowlands

Amy

2017

J Intellect Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, the treaty did deliver on this front and has prompted a widespread process of disability reform (Quinn 2009). However, some argue that it does not positively impact the lives of all persons with disabilities evenly (Dimopoulos 2010). Others consider that, even though they are equally entitled to benefit from the provisions of the Convention, people with intellectual disabilities have faced marginalization to such an extent that they are often not well placed to gain from its changes (ILO 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsidering Sheltered Workshops in Light of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006)

May‐Simera

2018

Laws

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sheltered work and related practices remain a prevalent service for people with intellectual disabilities. However, as a result of being placed in these, participants overwhelmingly remain segregated and excluded from their wider communities. This paper explores whether, with the advent of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, we can at least begin to assess the equality implications of such placements and argue that the experience of segregation itself represents numerous rights violations and discrimination. Having considered traditional equality mechanisms and their bearing on people with intellectual disabilities, this discussion explores how far the Convention's re-envisioning of the basic principles of equality can perhaps provide a more promising outlook and ideological stance. Indeed, during the Convention's inception, the negotiations circled around the conflicting opinions as to the purpose, usefulness, and future of sheltered work, revealing the existing tensions between protection and autonomy, shrouding all disability policy discussions. As a result, the question of sheltered work is not explicitly addressed in the treaty and the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities have been unable to definitively declare that the practice of sheltered work constitutes an act of discrimination. However, the Committee does as times demand that sheltered workshops be phased out where it is obvious that the practice of sheltered work is directly linked to the exploitation of workers. Moreover, certain provisions in the Convention might help in determining wrongful discrimination in some, if limited, instances.

show abstract

“…; Owen & Griffiths ). PWID often have difficulties accessing their HR (Degener ; UN General Assembly ; Quinn ; Dimopoulos ), remaining invisible from education and social planning (Owen et al . ; Correia & Martins ), receiving reactive and non‐consented care in detriment of their most basic HR to live, to privacy and to be treated with respect (Healthcare Commission ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating ‘FREDA Challenge’: A Coproduced Human Rights Board Game in Services for People With Intellectual Disabilities

Montenegro

Greenhill

2014

Research Intellect Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Issues in Human Rights Protection of Intellectually Disabled Persons

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Sterilization of those with intellectual disability: Evolution from non-consensual interventions to strict safeguards

Sterilization of those with intellectual disability: Evolution from non-consensual interventions to strict safeguards

Reconsidering Sheltered Workshops in Light of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006)

Evaluating ‘FREDA Challenge’: A Coproduced Human Rights Board Game in Services for People With Intellectual Disabilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About