A/HRC/43/27 laws may be presented as “disability neutral”, but in fact they reflect the medical model of disability and are couched in the terms of ableism. Such fear-based reactions tend to increase the number of instances of arbitrary detention, the ratio of persons with psychosocial disabilities in prisons and violations of the right to due process, among others. 19. “Persons with disabilities need protection.” Being considered historically as vulnerable, overprotection is a very common response to persons with disabilities, as espoused by the charity model of disability. This leads to infantilization, substitution of the person in decision-making and denial of autonomy. Legal consequences vary, although most commonly, persons with disabilities are denied the right to exercise legal capacity, that is, legal agency to make their own decisions, such as accepting or rejecting treatment and executing contracts. 20. “Persons with disabilities are incapable.” This presumption is closely linked to the idea that persons with disabilities need protection because they are considered, inter alia, incapable of making decisions, working and learning. This is reflected in multiple areas, for example, social protection systems are commonly developed on the assumption that benefits are necessary because persons with disabilities cannot work. This reinforces the charity model, eliminating any expectation of entering the open labour market. 21. “Persons with disabilities have a life of less value/less quality.”5 This premise has underpinned many debates in favour of prenatal testing and disability-selective termination of pregnancies in cases in which foetal impairment has been detected. It assumes that it would be desirable to avoid the birth of a child who would presumably have a poor quality of life. Similarly, the same premise figures in discussions on end of life and assisted dying. For example, some jurisdictions are expanding the criteria for having access to assisted dying beyond terminally ill persons whose death is reasonably foreseen, to persons with disabilities with degenerative impairments or illnesses and those with static impairments who face reduced functioning, which reinforces the idea that the latter also have a life that is not worth living.6 22. “Persons with disabilities are less than human.” This stereotype operates on the assumption that persons with disabilities do not share human feelings and emotions, and thus do not share a common human dignity. Most commonly, this stereotype typically applies to persons with intellectual disabilities, persons with autism, and others whose expressions and communication may differ from what is considered “normal”. This dehumanization and objectification of persons with disabilities has been at the root of alarming practices; for example, medical experimentation, including eugenics, infanticide, filicide, locking up individuals at home or school or in institutions, including in cages or shackles, withholding food and health care, and all forms of violence, exploitation and abuse, including forced prostitution and trafficking. 23. “Persons with disabilities are sexually abnormal (e.g., they are stereotyped as asexual, inactive, overactive, incapable or sexually perverse).”7 This presumption is usually disproportionally applied to persons with intellectual disabilities and persons with psychosocial disabilities, notably women and girls. This stereotype prevents them from accessing sex-related information and developing a healthy sex life. Usually, relatives, teachers and health-care professionals are either untrained or unconfident in discussing sexuality with persons with disabilities, preventing them from accessing quality sexual and reproductive health care, which is reflected in poorer health outcomes. 8 24. “Persons with disabilities are extraordinary/overachievers.” This premise, though framed positively, has the effect of reinforcing the stereotypes of persons with disabilities by highlighting and celebrating “overcoming” impairments. It operates on the assumption that people living with an impairment cannot succeed and, when it happens, it is 5 6 7 8 CRPD/C/POL/CO/1, para. 13 (a). See A/HRC/43/41. Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, general comment No. 3 (2016) on women and girls with disabilities, para. 47. A/72/133, paras. 18–19. 5