Author: Sarisha Harikrishna
August 21, 2024
Origins of Forced Sterilization
Over the years, the forced sterilization of women and girls with disabilities has been thrust into the limelight and rightfully so. Compulsory sterilization, or forced sterilization as it is better known, is defined as the involuntary or coerced removal of an individual’s ability to reproduce, usually through a procedure known as tubal ligation, where a woman’s Fallopian tubes are tied. This issue is not new but one that is long-running, going back as far as the 19th and 20th centuries during Nazi rule when those who were labelled as “undesirable” were forced to undergo this procedure.
Its persistence into the 21st century is alarming as it paints a poignant picture on how this form of systemic prejudice continues to affect vulnerable women and girls. Recent reports have solidified the fact that disabled women and girls placed under guardianship have higher incidences of being subjected to this procedure.
Background of the issue
At present, there is a lack of a common legislation in Europe, thereby leaving the decision to outlaw this practice under the prerogative of each EU Member State. This is incredibly problematic as forced sterilization, which is a practice that robs an individual of their bodily autonomy and a human rights issue, falls under the discretion of an individual state instead of the international community as a whole. In 2023, María Eugenia Rodríguez Palop, a member of the European Parliament, stated that this procedure is a very cruel practice of domination of one’s sexuality and reproduction. Her sentiments have been echoed by other prominent activists such as Cristina Paredero who worked tirelessly to draft a law in her home country of Spain to outlaw this procedure after having been forced through it herself.
Recently, a study was conducted by the European Disability Forum to further dissect and unveil the scope of countries that still have not outlawed the practice of forced sterilization. It was incredibly alarming and disturbing when the study showed that at least 14 EU members still actively engage in this practice. Countries such as Hungary, Portugal and Czechia (formerly the Czech Republic) are among those yet to outlaw a practice that has received widespread condemnation from international rights organizations, including the United Nations themselves. More shockingly, these three countries still allow this invasive procedure to be performed on young girls, a vulnerable group that should be afforded protection.
Forced sterilization has been recognized by the United Nations as a type of torture, yet judicial and legal systems in European countries still continue to condone it. For instance, Leilani Muir O’Malley of Alberta, Canada discovered only after she had gotten married that she had been sterilized in her teens, being robbed of her human right to make the choice on her own. Her sterilization was disguised as a procedure to remove her appendix, a cunning way to deceive her of the procedure she was to be subjected to. Her own experience led her to sue the Alberta government, finally winning her case in 1996. In another case, Rosario Ruiz of Seville, Spain, who has an intellectual disability was subjected to forced sterilization by her parents, ultimately shattering her dream of entering motherhood.
Why Force Women and Girls to Undergo Sterilization?
In order to further understand the prevalence of forced sterilization on women and girls with disabilities, it is imperative to further analyze the reasons behind why some individuals still support a practice that is so morally wrong. One of the clearer reasons behind this is that girls and women with disabilities are incapable of raising a child by themselves or potentially having a family in the future. This type of thinking is dangerous because it generalizes any woman or girl with a disability as being unfit to make decisions of their own regarding their future. However, it is pertinent to note that there are several different types of disabilities that affect how a woman or girl can be deemed fit to form their own consent. Unfortunately, in recent years, those with intellectual disabilities have been sterilized against their own will, even when it’s not medically necessary.
Another argument put forward by those in support of the practice is that it is a preventive measure in curbing potential sexual abuse of women and girls with disabilities. Their caretakers and guardians are also increasingly anxious about their children being subjected to sexual abuse, which pushes them to seek out this procedure for their children. However, this can prove counterintuitive as it actually makes a person with disabilities more susceptible to sexual abuse.
It is clear that the crux of the argument often boils down to trying to protect the woman, but by stripping her of her right to her own body, are they really trying to protect her? Or is it just a means of subduing her and making her easier to take care of? These are critical questions that have been raised regarding this issue since it is both legally and morally unsound to subject someone to this procedure unless a medical necessity. For instance, since the year 2019, Iceland has taken a step forward and banned the practice, with the exception that it is medically necessary.
Violations of International Law
It is undeniable that the act of forcing an individual with disabilities to be sterilized against their will is a clear erosion of morality. However, it is also pertinent to delve into the violations of international law that arise as a result of this act. The main convention that comes into play is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). Article 12 of the UNCRPD guarantees that individuals with disabilities are afforded equal treatment before the law, with respect to reproductive autonomy and legal capacity. Furthermore, General Comment No.3, which was released by the UNCRPD, acknowledges that forced sterilization is a cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.
Article 12 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) prohibits the act of forced sterilization. Article 39 of the Istanbul Convention further outlines that acts such as forced abortion and forced sterilization are outlawed. In addition, Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) prohibits this procedure to protect those against cruel treatment. Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) also prohibits acts of torture which include the act of forced sterilization.
Suggested Reforms
The progress shown by other countries in terms of outlawing this practice is one that should be welcomed. Nonetheless, it is also good to evaluate the possible reforms that can be done in order to further empower women and girls with disabilities to make their own decisions. More sensible and legally sound frameworks should be established in order to safeguard the rights of these women and girls against the voices of their caretakers who may not always have their best interests at hand. In addition, more comprehensive sex education classes should be given to them to further equip them with all of the necessary information so that they can make decisions for their future and bodies.
Glossary
Bodily autonomy: The power to make choices regarding one’s own body.
Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW): A human rights treaty adopted by the United Nations (UN) to women’s rights and fundamental freedoms on a basis of equality with men in all areas of life.
Counterintuitive: Something that does not happen in the way that one would expect it to.
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR): A convention that requires its member nations to work together towards greater peace and unity based on human rights.
Fallopian tubes: A pair of hollow, muscular ducts located between your ovaries and your uterus.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): An international treaty that commits all nations to ensure the equal rights of both men and women.
Pertinent: Having a clear decisive relevance to the matter at hand.
Prerogative: Something that certain people are able or allowed to do or have, but is not possible for everyone.
Sterilization: A surgical procedure for the permanent prevention of conception by removing or interrupting the pathways through which gametes (ovum in women and sperm in men) travel.
Susceptible: Easily influenced or likely to be harmed by something.
Systemic prejudice: Also referred to as ableism, systemic prejudice is a deeply embedded type of prejudice or bias against a certain community.
The Istanbul Convention: The Istanbul Convention, also known as the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women mandates the parties to actively develop laws and policies to end violence against women.
Tubal ligation: A form of permanent birth control where a woman’s fallopian tubes is cut, blocked or sealed off in order to prevent pregnancy.
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD): A human rights instrument that seeks to reaffirm the rights of individuals with disabilities.