A/63/175 (i) Medical or scientific experimentation 58. Under article 15 of CRPD medical or scientific experimentation on persons with disabilities, including testing of medicines, is permissible only when the person concerned gives his or her free consent and when the very nature of the experiment cannot be deemed torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. 22 (ii) Medical interventions 59. The practice of lobotomy and psychosurgery can serve as examples. The more intrusive and irreversible the treatment, the greater the obligation on States to ensure that health professionals provide care to persons with disabilities only on the basis of their free and informed consent. In the case of children, States must ensure that health professionals carry out such interventions only if they serve a therapeutic purpose, are in the best interests of the child, and are based on the free and informed consent of the parents (though parental consent must be disregarded if the treatment is not in the best interest of the child). 23 Otherwise, the Special Rapporteur notes that such treatments may constitute torture, or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. a. Abortion and sterilization 60. Innumerable adults and children with disabilities have been forcibly sterilized as a result of policies and legislation enacted for that purpose. 24 Persons with disabilities, and particularly women and girls, continue to be subjected to forced abortion and sterilization without their free and informed consent inside and outside institutions, 25 a practice in relation to which concern has been expressed. 26 The Special Rapporteur notes that under article 23 (c) of CRPD States parties have an obligation to ensure that “persons with disabilities, including children, retain their __________________ 22 23 24 25 26 14 See HRI/GEN/7/Rev.8, sect. II, Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 20 (1992) on the prohibition of torture and cruel treatment or punishment, para 6. For a discussion of related issues, see the Disability Rights Washington Investigative Report Regarding the “Ashley Treatment”, May 2007, available at: www.disabilityrightswa.org/news-1/ ashley-treatment-investigation. For example, concerning Nazi-era policy on forced sterilization, see M. Grodin and G. Annas, “Physicians and torture: lessons from the Nazi doctors, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 89, No. 867, 2007, pp. 638 and 639. See M. L. Perlin, et al., International Human Rights and Comparative Mental Disability Law: Cases and Materials (Durham, N.C., Carolina Academic Press, 2006), p. 980. See United Nations Population Fund, Sexual and Reproductive Health of Persons with Disabilities, 2007. See also the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (E/CN.4/2005/51), para 12. The Human Rights Committee has referred to the sterilization of women without their consent as well as to forced abortion as a breach of article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. See HRI/GEN/1/Rev.8, sect. II, Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 28 (2000) on equality of rights between men and women, para. 11. See also Committee against Torture, concluding observations on the third periodic report of the Czech Republic (CAT/C/CR/32/2, paras. 5 (k) and 6 (n)) and on the fourth periodic report of Peru (CAT/C/PER/ CO/4, para. 23); Human Rights Committee, concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Peru (CCPR/CO/70/PER, para. 21); on the second periodic report of the Czech Republic (CCPR/C/CZE/CO/2, para. 10); on the second periodic report of Slovakia (CCPR/CO/ 78/SVK, paras. 12 and 21), and on the fourth periodic report of Japan (CCPR/C/79/Add.102, para. 31). 08-44075