 |
 |
|
|
|
|
Article
25 - Health
Background Documents | Article
25 Background
Seventh Session | Sixth Session | Fourth
Session | Third Session
Working Group | References
Sixth Session
Draft article 21
77. There was general agreement in the Committee that draft article 21 should
address the right to health, and a separate draft article 21 bis should
address habilitation and rehabilitation. The Committee did not resolve,
however, whether to retain medical, or health-related, rehabilitation in
Article 21, or to delete all references to it and deal with it in Article
21 bis. The Committee agreed to consider this issue, and the proposed texts
for Article 21 bis, further at a later date.
78. It was also generally agreed that the concept of health, as defined
by the World Health Organisation, was a very broad one and that this needed
to be reflected in the text (or a footnote). This could be achieved by using
the descriptive language of the International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights.
79. A proposal was made that persons with disabilities should not be denied
food, water or life support, and this was supported by a number of delegations.
Chapeau
80. There was some support to strengthen the chapeau by replacing the word
“recognise” with “guarantee”.
81. The chapeau currently reads:
States Parties [recognise/guarantee] that all persons with disabilities
have the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical
and mental health without discrimination on the basis of disability. States
Parties shall ensure no person with a disability is deprived of that right,
and shall take all appropriate measures to ensure access for persons with
disabilities to [affordable/free] health and [medical/health-related rehabilitation
services]. In particular, States Parties shall:
Paragraphs (a) to (m)
82. There was broad agreement that the sub-paragraphs should be strengthened
by the deletion of qualifying words such as “strive”, although there was
also some limited support for retaining the idea of progressive realisation
in the text.
83. It was also generally agreed that in many of the sub-paragraphs there
was a great deal of duplication with other Articles in the Convention text
and that others were too prescriptive. There were consequently many proposals
to streamline or delete sub-paragraphs including:
(d), which was too prescriptive, and in any case, if were retained, more
properly belonged in the new proposed draft article 21 bis on rehabilitation;
(f) and (m), on which there was general agreement at the fourth session
to consolidate in draft article 4 f ;
(g) on the grounds that the Committee agreed at its 4th session to consider
general language on the training of professionals dealing with persons with
disabilities, but without prejudice to its inclusion or ultimate placement
in the text g , and
(l) which not only replicates part of sub-paragraph (j) but also is covered
in Article 14.
84. The Committee was noted that where text was to be deleted or merged,
there was a need to ensure that important elements were not lost, and were
incorporated in the text when the same issues were considered again under
other Articles. It would be necessary, for example, to reconsider whether
the confidentiality of medical records was adequately covered under draft
article 14.
85. Some delegations proposed the deletion of the words “including sexual
and reproductive health services” from sub-paragraph (a), but there was
broad support for retaining it. The Committee noted that this phrase was
not intended to alter or prejudice the general policies of governments in
regard to family planning or related matters, to the extent that these were
permitted by national legislation of general application. The phrase was
a statement on the right to be free from non-discrimination, and its effect
was that persons with disabilities would need to be treated on an equal
basis with others in this area.
86. In paragraph (a), there was general agreement to include the concept
of population-based public health programmes, and general support to replace
the word “citizens” with “persons”.
87. In paragraph (b) there was support to include the concept of early detection
and treatment
88. There was also support for adding “rural areas” after “people's own
communities” in paragraph (c).
89. There were divergent views on whether paragraph (e) should deal with
prevention of secondary disabilities, the prevention of disabilities more
generally, or be deleted entirely on the grounds that its provisions were
already covered adequately by preceding sub-paragraphs.
90. There was also some support for proposals to add references to the compatibility
of research with respect for human rights and the protection of human life
to paragraph (f), if this sub-paragraph were retained.
91. There was also general support to merge paragraphs (h), (i) and (j).
92. Some delegations considered that (k) should be deleted because the issue
would be covered by draft article 12bis. Other delegations preferred to
retain it here.
93. Following the discussion, paragraphs (a) – (j) of the text read:
(a) provide persons with disabilities with the same range and standard of
[affordable/free] health [and rehabilitation services] as provided other
persons, [including sexual and reproductive health services] and population-based
public health programmes;
(b) provide those health and [medical/health-related rehabilitation] services
needed by persons with disabilities specifically because of their disabilities
[including early identification and intervention as appropriate];
(c) endeavour to provide these health and [medical/health-related rehabilitation]
services as close as possible to people's own communities [and in rural
areas];
(e) [provide programs and services to prevent and protect against [secondary]
disabilities, including amongst children and the elderly;]
(f) [encourage research and the development, dissemination and application
of new knowledge and technologies that benefit persons with disabilities
[that are compatible with the respect for human rights and the protection
of human life] ];
(h/i/j) require health professionals to provide care of the same quality
to persons with disabilities as to others by, where necessary, raising awareness
of the human rights, dignity, autonomy and needs of persons with disabilities
through training and the promulgation, in consultation with other concerned
parties, of ethical standards for public and private healthcare.
94. The draft article was referred to the facilitator (Mu'taz Hyassat, Jordan)
for further discussion.