Join the Conversation on
32 people
0 stories
5 posts
Explore Our Newsletters
What's New in
See full photo

IF US Supreme Court Overturns Roe, The US Is IN Violation of International Charter on Human Rights

In 2018, the United Nations Human Rights council clarified that the obligation of the International Declaration of Human Rights includes the right to access to abortion services. In fact even further guidance suggests that not doing so is a violation of various treaties that have been signed internationally that are legally binding. Treaties regarding women's rights and equality all explicitly and inherently include this fundamental right in the very nature of their existence and all signatories (of which the United States is one on many of such international treaties) are legally bound to this obligation.

Further guidance released by the United Nations states "Human rights bodies have provided clear guidance on the need to decriminalize abortion. Ensuring access to these services in accordance with human rights standards is part of State obligations to eliminate discrimination against women and to ensure women’s right to health as well as other fundamental human rights."

In addition, General comment No. 36 (2018) on article 6 of the

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the

right to life states in section 8 that "Although States parties may adopt measures designed to regulate voluntary

terminations of pregnancy, such measures must not result in violation of the right to life of a pregnant woman or girl, or her other rights under the Covenant. Thus, restrictions on the

ability of women or girls to seek abortion must not, inter alia, jeopardize their lives, subject them to physical or mental pain or suffering which violates article 7, discriminate against

them or arbitrarily interfere with their privacy. States parties must provide safe, legal and effective access to abortion where the life and health of the pregnant woman or girl is at

risk, and where carrying a pregnancy to term would cause the pregnant woman or girl substantial pain or suffering, most notably where the pregnancy is the result of rape or

incest or is not viable. [8] In addition, States parties may not regulate pregnancy or abortion in all other cases in a manner that runs contrary to their duty to ensure that women and girls

do not have to undertake unsafe abortions, and they should revise their abortion laws accordingly. [9] For example, they should not take measures such as criminalizing pregnancies by unmarried women or apply criminal sanctions against women and girls undergoing abortion [10] or against medical service providers assisting them in doing so, since taking such measures compel women and girls to resort to unsafe abortion. States parties should not introduce new barriers and should remove existing barriers [11] that deny effective access by women and girls to safe and legal abortion [12], including barriers caused as a result of the exercise of conscientious objection by individual medical

providers. [13] States parties should also effectively protect the lives of women and girls against the mental and physical health risks associated with unsafe abortions. In particular,

they should ensure access for women and men, and, especially, girls and boys, [14] to quality and evidence-based information and education about sexual and reproductive health [15] and to a wide range of affordable contraceptive methods, [16] and prevent the stigmatization of women and girls seeking abortion.[17] States parties should ensure the

availability of, and effective access to, quality prenatal and post-abortion health care for women and girls, [18] in all circumstances, and on a confidential basis. [19]"

Unrestricted access to abortion is a human right and the moment the court finalizes this, they become internationally illegitimate criminals.

#Abortion #WomensHealth #humanrights #HealthCare #Law #Legal #UnitedNations #Sexuality #MentalHealth #ChronicIllness #LGBTQ #Safety #Prochoice #freedom #rights #DisabilityRights #equality #SupremeCourt #Illegitimate #InternationalHealth #who #unitedstates #Us #Discrimination


He entered a guilty plea #Csa #Legal #Survivor

When I was 10 I was sexually assaulted by a distant relative. I lost that memory for nearly ten years. When I remembered and disclosed I was treated with disbelief and invalidation. Last year, at 49, I reported the assault to police. Despite my sketchy memory they charged him. Three counts of forcible touching of a girl. Today, after discussions between his lawyer and the police prosecutor, he pled guilty to one charge. I’m 50. The assault was nearly 40 years ago. There was no physical evidence and no witnesses. There was no sentencing agreement, however he will probably receive a lighter sentence because of his guilty plea. He pled guilty and now the legal stuff is nearly over. I get to make a victim impact statement, in which I describe what I’ve lost. I’m not sure I can describe the complete loss of myself but I’ll try.

1 comment

I will not feel guilty for struggling

So I'm currently being given what is essentially an asbo and I know this is the police saying I'm not really ill or I'm just faking suicide attempts but fuck it. I know what I feel and I know how painful this all is. I'm not destroying myself to prove anything.
#BPD #Legal #Police #asbo #positive


My EDS Is About To Go On Trial

My EDS (Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome) is about to go on trial. I am on the tail end of a very complicated & contensious divorce and I am concerned not only about myself, but also the precedent this could create.
I have been disabled for over 12 years, the majority of the marriage. I've always had symptoms of EDS but a car accident triggered a downward spiral of health issues. I went through a 3 year law suit that generated an enormous amount of medical paperwork to back up all of my injuries. This includes permanant nerve & ligament damage to my right leg, causing me to drag it (drop foot). Mobility is sometimes an isdue. Unfortunately even with all of my documented health issues, I do not yet have disability through social security. My soon to be ex did not want me to pursue it during the marriage, so now it is so far past that most lawyers aren't interested in the case. So this leaves me a single, disabled mom trying to survive.
Even with a diagnosis from one of the top EDS doctors in the country, and most of my care team in agreeance long before the dx, my ex insisted on denying it was real. Early on in the divorce case, it was presented during the PL (pendente lite) hearing. And the magistrate completely disregarded everything & insisted I was voluntarily impoverished. It was unreal. This is where my concern for the precedence comes in. Most people with disabilities are probably not going to be able to afford to bring in expert witness to explain the complexity of EDS. Is this the way EDS is seen in the legal community? Are others being or will be brushed off even with extensive medical documentation?
My daughter is also affected (currently with a dx of hypermobility spectrum syndrome) & I now have a disability government agency that confirmed my medical paperwork & gave me a Schedule A. And still I worry. Two weeks & it's go time.

Has anyone else experienced this? How about for any other medical dx?

Thanks for reading! #EDS #EhlersDanlos #Divorce #raynauds #MCAS #Dysautonomia #Vertigo #Allergies #Legal