The battle begins over abortion rights, denial of medical treatment and Israel at the United Nations Ad Hoc Committee on a Convention for the Disabled

August 22, 2006

(Manhattan, New York)—An ideological battle has erupted at the United Nations during the final session of the drafting of the Convention of Persons with Disabilities. Tensions are raised high during the last week of the draft which dates back three years, while delegates refuse to give way on several key areas of proposed language.

ECLJ has been working with international pro-life coalitions in meeting with delegates including the United States, the Holy See, European, Asian, African and Caribbean representatives.

The key areas of concern involve the areas of reproductive health, gender and medical treatment. The Coalition has sponsored language for Article 25, proffered into the conference by Qatar, stating: “Health: Prevent discriminatory denial of medical treatment or food and fluids, regardless of the method of administration, necessary to preserve life based on present or predicated disability or perceived quality of life.” The major concern of ECLJ and the Coalition is the international sponsorship of euthanasia or removal of care as in the case of Terri Schiavo, which it has been working with delegates to prevent by the addition of above clause. It has met opposition from the European Union, represented by Finland, who has received instructions from the foreign ministry of the European Commission represented by Italy. It is very important to remember that although the Union speaks with a sole voice at United Nations events, the support of the liberal agenda being proffered by the EU has caused much internal dissent from countries like Poland and Malta.

In addition to today’s battle over Article 25, the week will bring equally heated debate over the addition and definition of language which would support an international recognition of the right to abortion. The use of liberal language in defining gender has also been used, with ECLJ battling for the use of the wording sex rather than gender in order to prevent an international legal definition of gender as being anything different than only a man and a woman.

ECLJ is fighting hard for these changes and additions for two reasons. First, it wishes to prevent the addition of liberal language to international customary international law. Reproductive health language at the United Nations has already been used in a ruling to legalize abortion in Colombia as an international right. Second, the European Centre views the disabilities convention as an important step forward in removing international barriers for the disabled. The addition of unnecessary language supporting a pro-choice or radical feminist agenda takes all credibility away from an otherwise very important document.

The ideological battle at the conference was all the more evident on Friday afternoon when many delegates took time to express their views of an Israeli occupation in Lebanon, views wholly inappropriate and lacking in relevance for a conference on disabilities.