Sexual abuse of people with disabilities is a topic that is not readily discussed, nor is it well known. In my master’s thesis I delve into the reasons why the sexual abuse of people with disabilities is much more rampant than it may seem. I begin by defining ‘people with disabilities’ and examining the relevant terminology. I continue by putting people with disabilities in the social context and explaining how the value judgments of the normative society impact the perception of such people and shape their standing in the society. I then move on to presenting the different types of discrimination that people with disabilities face in all aspects of their lives, and outlining Slovenia’s commitments in this field. I focus particularly on ableism and its impact on the sexual lives of people with disabilities, i.e. their inclusion in all areas of sexuality and the subsequent – and legitimized – interference in their sexual autonomy and reproductive rights. I then look at the practice of stripping people with disabilities of their legal capacity, and elaborate on why this is tantamount to infringing their most fundamental rights. I propose supported decision making as a more suitable alternative, which has been advocated by the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. I proceed by examining how the abovementioned practices and social circumstances lead to a point where the society turns a blind eye on the violence perpetrated against people with disabilities and how this violence is subsequently normalized. Next, I focus directly on the sexual abuse of people with disabilities and present research findings that highlight the frequency of the abuse and offer an insight into the reasons why people with disabilities are significantly more exposed to sexual abuse compared to the normative population. Specifically, I propose the statistics showing the frequency of the crime defined as the ‘sexual abuse of a vulnerable individual’ under Article 172 of the Criminal Code (KZ-1). I also lay out the various models used for regulating sexual crimes against at-risk individuals under criminal law in theory and practice. To this end I compare the regulation before and after the latest amendments to the Criminal Code (KZ-1 v. KZ-1H). I go on to analize the relevant case law to see if, and to what extent, the value judgments pinned on people with disabilities affect judicial outcomes where the victim of a sexual crime is a person with a disability. In the end, I review the capacity assessment test, which is routinely used by the courts to assess whether a victim who is an individual at risk is able to express consent to sexual relations, and I propose more fitting solutions that uphold the victim’s autonomy. I conclude by looking at the accessibility of courts for people with disabilities.
|
