A/HRC/40/54 23. While disability-specific forms of deprivation of liberty are particularly prevalent among persons with intellectual or psychosocial disabilities, they affect the whole diversity of persons with disabilities. In some countries, deaf and blind children continue to be institutionalized for no reason other than access to education. Persons with cerebral palsy are regularly placed into institutions for the purpose of “treatment” and “rehabilitation”. Persons with albinism are sometimes de facto deprived of their liberty in sheltered homes and protection centres. Persons affected by leprosy were sent for life to leprosariums. 24. Persons with disabilities deprived of their liberty are invariably placed into an extremely vulnerable position. They are at serious risk of sexual and physical violence, sterilization and human trafficking. They also experience a higher risk of being subjected to torture and inhuman and degrading treatment, including forced medication and electroshock, restraints and solitary confinement. They are even denied medical care and left to die.18 Moreover, persons with disabilities deprived of their liberty are often formally stripped of their legal capacity, without opportunities to challenge the deprivation of liberty, and in the long run invisible and forgotten by the wider community. Indeed, due to the mistaken belief that those practices are benevolent and well intentioned and do not constitute deprivation of liberty, the situation of persons with disabilities deprived of their liberty is hardly monitored by national preventive mechanisms or national human rights institutions. IV. Underlying causes of disability-specific forms of deprivation of liberty 25. The causes of disability-specific forms of deprivation of liberty are universally misunderstood. While most people believe that triggers are related to the impairment, at the core the underlying causes are largely social. 26. Stigma often lies at the root of the various forms of deprivation of liberty experienced by persons with disabilities. In most countries, they are extremely stigmatized as a result of widespread misconceptions. For example, there is a predominant view that some persons with disabilities are unable to live in the community, as they need “specialized care” provided in institutions. Cultural or religious beliefs may also feed stigma. The perception that persons with disabilities are possessed by evil spirits, or that impairments are the result of sin or witchcraft, make families feel fearful and/or ashamed, prompting the social rejection and segregation of persons with disabilities. Some people also believe that impairments are contagious and therefore persons with disabilities should be separated from society. 27. A central aspect of the prejudice against persons with psychosocial disabilities is the baseless belief that they are prone to violence. This assumption has proven to be wrong, in fact, evidence shows that they are actually more likely to be victims of violence. 19 However, the stereotype of dangerousness has significantly increased over the last decades, fuelled by negative media coverage that emphasizes a psychiatric history of a perpetrator or, failing that, speculates about an “untreated” diagnosis.20 Moreover, it negatively impacts on how service providers and the general public react in situations involving persons with psychosocial disabilities, leading to social distance, discriminatory behaviour and recourse to coercive practices.21 28. Furthermore, there is evidence that mental health professionals hold negative conceptions about the dangerousness of people labelled with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, 18 19 20 21 Disability Rights International, Left behind: the exclusion of children and adults with disabilities from reform and rights protection in the Republic of Georgia (2013). S. Desmarais, “Community violence perpetration and victimization among adults with mental illnesses”, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 104, No. 12 (2014), pp. 2,342–2,349. J.P. Stuber and others, “Conceptions of mental illness: attitudes of mental health professionals and the general public”, Psychiatric Services, vol. 65, No. 4 (2014), pp. 490–497. K. McAleenan, “Perceptions of mental illness and mental health policy”, Psychology Honors Papers, No. 34 (2013), available at http://digitalcommons.conncoll.edu/psychhp/34. 7