Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this paper, I argue that the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Guidelines on Deinstitutionalization, Including in Emergencies function as an instrument and template for reparative justice towards persons still in institutions and survivors of institutionalization. The Guidelines construct deinstitutionalization as a reparative process at both the systemic and individual levels, as well as calling for the creation of reparation and redress mechanisms. I examine the entire body of the Guidelines, highlight their reparative content, and point out where the text may fall short of this perspective and how the shortcomings might be remedied. This paper is grounded in the situation of psychiatric institutionalization and the concerns of people subjected to that system, emphasizing issues faced by this constituency and its human rights concerns for redress and legal and societal change. The issues addressed include the following: the strengthening of normative standards with regard to the abolition of psychiatric institutionalization and forced interventions and the obligation to immediately end these violations; a policy shift towards the de-medicalization of psychosocial disability; the implications of reparative justice in diminishing the role and authority of those that have operated institutions including the mental health system; the role of adult persons with disabilities as members of families and the role played by some family members in institutionalization; issues to be considered in designing reparations processes and mechanisms. Following some introductory remarks, this paper is structured to follow the outline of the Guidelines, quoting the text with interspersed comments and ending with a brief conclusion.

This reflection responds primarily to the papers on legal agency and state intervention, with brief comments on the two other papers. The concept of transformative equality, developed in jurisprudence under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), can promote a deeper understanding of the rights of persons with disabilities. 1 In particular, it is useful to address power relations between disabled and non-disabled persons not only with respect to family members and medical professionals, but also in the institutions of law and the state.

In this paper, I argue that the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Guidelines on Deinstitutionalization, Including in Emergencies function as an instrument and template for reparative justice towards persons still in institutions and survivors of institutionalization. The Guidelines construct deinstitutionalization as a reparative process at both the systemic and individual levels, as well as calling for the creation of reparation and redress mechanisms. I examine the entire body of the Guidelines, highlight their reparative content, and point out where the text may fall short of this perspective and how the shortcomings might be remedied. This paper is grounded in the situation of psychiatric institutionalization and the concerns of people subjected to that system, emphasizing issues faced by this constituency and its human rights concerns for redress and legal and societal change. The issues addressed include the following: the strengthening of normative standards with regard to the abolition of psychiatric institutionalization and forced interventions and the obligation to immediately end these violations; a policy shift towards the de-medicalization of psychosocial disability; the implications of reparative justice in diminishing the role and authority of those that have operated institutions including the mental health system; the role of adult persons with disabilities as members of families and the role played by some family members in institutionalization; issues to be considered in designing reparations processes and mechanisms. Following some introductory remarks, this paper is structured to follow the outline of the Guidelines, quoting the text with interspersed comments and ending with a brief conclusion.

There is growing international resistance to the oppressiveness of psychiatry. While previous studies have critiqued psychiatry, Psychiatry Disrupted goes beyond theorizing what is wrong with it to theorizing how we might stop it. Introducing readers to the arguments and rationale for opposing psychiatry, the book combines perspectives from anti-psychiatry and critical psychiatry activism, mad activism, antiracist, critical, and radical disability studies, as well as feminist, Marxist, and anarchist thought. The editors and contributors are activists and academics - adult education and social work professors, psychologists, prominent leaders in the psychiatric survivor movement, and artists - from across Canada, England, and the United States. From chapters discussing feminist opposition to the medicalization of human experience, to the links between psychiatry and neo-liberalism, to internal tensions within the various movements and different identities from which people organize, the collection theorizes psychiatry while contributing to a range of scholarship and presenting a comprehensive overview of resistance to psychiatry in the academy and in the community. Contributors include Simon Adam (University of Toronto), Rosemary Barnes University of Toronto, Peter Beresford (Brunel University), Bonnie Burstow (University of Toronto), Chris Chapman (York University), Mark Cresswell (Durham University), Shaindl Diamond (York University), Chava Finkler (Memorial University), Ambrose Kirby (therapist in private practice, Brenda A. LeFrançois (Memorial University of Newfoundland), Mick McKeown (University of Central Lancashire), Robert Menzies (Simon Fraser University), China Mills (Oxford University), Tina Minkowitz (World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry), Ian Parker (University of Leicester), Susan Schellenberg, Helen Spandler (University of Central Lancashire), and AJ Withers (York University). A courageous anthology, Psychiatry Disrupted is a timely work that asks compelling activist questions that no other book in the field touches.

It is the contention of this paper that forced psychiatric interventions violate the universal prohibition of torture. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) lays the basis for this argument to be developed in a series of steps, starting from its recognition of equal legal capacity and free and informed consent of persons with disabilities, and equal right to respect for physical and mental integrity, as well as the freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Article 25 of the CRPD requires States Parties to ensure that health care is provided to persons with disabilities on the basis of free and informed consent, on an equal basis with others. Controversy erupted over the insertion and later removal of a footnote to Article 12(2) restricting the meaning of legal capacity in three of the six official UN languages to \"capacity for rights.\"

This chapter derives from the experience of the author in working on the drafting of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The drafting was an extraordinary experience of cooperation and shared power that is particularly unusual in the experience of users and survivors of psychiatry. The combination of international human rights and a social model of disability that highlights discrimination allowed us to bring into focus the violations we experience, and allowed the other parties involved in the drafting and negotiations process to accept a radical change to international law, which is now working its way

\"18 Mozambique, like other African countries, is both \"a source and a destination country\" for human trafficking19 and the new law was a promising step forward in a region that had previously done litde to combat either internal or cross-border trafficking.20 C. SOUTHEAST ASIA Leaders of China, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam signed the Joint Declaration of the Coordinated Mekong Ministerial Initiative Against Human Trafficking (COMMIT Declaration) on December 14, 2007.21 The region is widely known as a hotbed of human trafficking,22 and the Declaration was \"aimed at identifying and protecting trafficked persons at every point in the trafficking cycle, and to ensure that all official actions with respect to trafficked persons protect their safety, dignity and rights.

In another war crimes case transferred from the ICTY to Bosnia, the Appellate Chamber of the Bosnian State Court increased the prison term of Radovan Stankovic from sixteen years to twenty years, stating that the original sentence had not met the purpose of punishment. Of approximately 240 cases of disappearances received by the Pakistan Supreme Court, 105 of the detainees were released, as reported by the government.328 Insofar as these releases were verified, they primarily came about due to increased pressure in 2007 by key individuals in the Pakistani judiciary emphasizing the rule of law and from international human rights groups, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Accompanied by family or not, children displaced by the Iraq war face overcrowded living conditions, inadequate medical services, and deficient or nonexistent educational opportunities.335 In January 2007, UNHCR issued a \"Supplementary Appeal Iraq Situation Response\" (the \"Supplementary Appeal\") and then a joint appeal with UNICEF in July 2007, entitled, \"Providing Education Opportunities to Iraqi Children in Host Countries\" (the \"Joint Appeal\"), which focused on replenishing depleted funds that provide refugees with essential medical care, educational facilities, and healthy living conditions.336 The main objectives of the Supplementary Appeal are to provide emergency services by targeting the needs of the most vulnerable displaced persons.