A/HRC/19/41 on grounds of public safety. The Court stated that “mere existence of a risk is insufficient for banning the event”.125 65. Special procedures have raised concerns regarding restrictions on freedom of expression – including direct censorship, bans on dissemination of information and restrictions on legitimate advocacy – purportedly justified on grounds of alleged threats to public health, morality or State security.126 Restrictions on information on sexual orientation, including those allegedly intended to protect “public decency”, can have a deleterious impact on public health efforts, including in relation to transmission of the HIV virus.127 E. Discriminatory practices in the family and community 66. While families and communities are often an important source of support, discriminatory attitudes within families and communities can also inhibit the ability of LGBT people to enjoy the full range of human rights. Such discrimination manifests itself in various ways, including through individuals being excluded from family homes, disinherited, prevented from going to school, sent to psychiatric institutions, forced to marry, forced to relinquish children, punished for activist work and subjected to attacks on personal reputation. In many cases, lesbians, bisexual women and transgender people are especially at risk owing to entrenched gender inequalities that restrict autonomy in decision-making about sexuality, reproduction and family life.128 67. Family or community members often enforce gender norms and punish transgressions. In 1997, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women noted, “the community may also be the site of restrictions on and regulations of female sexuality … Women who …live out their sexuality in ways other than heterosexuality are often subjected to violence and degrading treatment.”129 United Nations mechanisms and nongovernmental organizations have documented a range of gender-specific violations targeted at women – including forced marriage, forced pregnancy, and rape in marriage – some of 125 126 127 128 129 European Court of Human Rights, Alekseyev v. Russia, applications Nos. 4916/07, 25924/08 and 14599/09, judgement of 21 October 2010, paras. 75-76. See the concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee on the Russian Federation (CCPR/C/RUS/CO/6), para. 27. See also Baczkowski and Others v. Poland, application no. 1543/06, 3 May 2007, para. 64. See A/58/380, paras. 6, 11-12 and 15-20; A/HRC/4/37, para. 95-97; A/HRC/4/37/Add.1, para. 402; and E/CN.4/2002/72, para. 57. See also the joint statement of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders, the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, and the Special Rapporteur on the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (on Nigeria), available from www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=5599&LangID=E (accessed 10 November 2011); and A/HRC/14/23/Add.1, para. 1401-1405 (on Lithuania). UNAIDS, Getting to Zero: 2011-2015 Strategy. See E/CN.4/2000/68/Add.5, para. 13, E/CN.4/2002/83, paras. 99-105, E/CN.4/2006/61/Add.3, para. 51 and A/HRC/4/34/Add.3, para. 34. See also CEDAW/C/GUA/CO/7, para. 19; and Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing Platform for Action, para. 96. Discriminatory attitudes are also sometimes reflected in decisions regarding child custody; for example, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has admitted a case concerning a lesbian mother and her daughters seeking redress for a decision by the Chilean authorities to deny custody based on sexual orientation: see Karen Atala and Daughters v. Chile, Case 1271-04, report No. 42/08, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.130 Doc. 22, rev. 1 (2008). E/CN/4/1997/47, para. 8. 21