| Summary: | Thesis (MPhil)--University of Stellenbosch, 2002. === ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The implementation of eugenic policies reached its peak during the zo" century
when thousands of people with intellectual disabilities and other "undesirable
qualities" were involuntary sterilized. Although most of the eugenic policies have
been removed, countries such as South Africa, still make legally provision for the
involuntary sterilization of people with intellectual disabilities.
Torbjërn Tannsjë (1998) used the "argument from autonomy" to argue that
involuntary sterilization practices are wrong because it involves compulsion.
According to him, society should never interfere with people's reproductive choices
and people should never be required to qualify for the right to have children. The
aim of this assignment was to systematically assess the "argument from autonomy"
as far as the policy of involuntary sterilization of people with intellectual disabilities is
concerned. To this end, the concept of autonomy and the principle of respect for
autonomy are discussed and applied to the intellectually disabled. It is argued that
autonomy and respect for autonomy are useful concepts to apply to some people
with intellectual disabilities. These individuals should not be automatically assumed
to be incompetent, but their competence needs to be determined on an individual
level, with reference to the complexity of the decision to be made. Special effort is
needed from health care professionals to obtain (where possible) informed consent
from people with intellectual disabilities. The application of the principle of respect
for autonomy to matters of reproduction leads to the conclusion that people with
severe to profound levels of disability, are unable to provide informed consent for
sexual intercourse. Therefore some form of paternalistic protection is needed for
these individuals. People with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities who are
however competent to consent to sexual intercourse should never be prohibited
from procreation by means of involuntary sterilization. State interference in matters
of reproduction should be limited to interventions where (i) children are seriously
harmed by parents and (ii) to protect those who are incompetent to consent to
sexual interactions with others. Apart from these exceptions, the intellectually
disabled is entitled to the same procreative rights as all other citizens. === AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die implementering van eugenetiese beleid het gedurende die 20 ste eeu 'n
hoogtepunt bereik met die onwillekeurige sterilisering van duisende persone met
intellektuele gestremdhede en ander "ongewensde kwaliteite". Alhoewel meeste
van die eugenetiese wetgewing verwyder is, maak lande soos Suid-Afrika steeds
wetlik voorsiening vir die onwillekeurige sterilisasie van persone met intellektuele
gestremdhede.
Torbjërn Tannsjo (1998) maak gebruik van die "outonomie argument" om te
argumenteer dat onwillekeurige sterilisasie praktyke onaanvaarbaar is omdat dit
dwang bevat. Hy voer aan dat die samelewing nooit in die reproduktiewe keuses
van mense behoort in te meng nie en dat dit nooit vir mense nodig moet wees om
vir ouerskap te kwalifiseer nie. Die doel van hierdie werkstuk was om sistematies
die "outonomie argument" te analiseer ten opsigte van die beleid van die
onwillekeurige sterilisasie van persone met intellektuele gestremdhede. Met hierdie
doel voor oë word die konsep outonomie en die beginsel van respek vir outonomie
bespreek en toegepas op die intellektueel gestremde persoon. Daar word
aangevoer dat outonomie en respek vir outonomie nuttige beginsels is om in ag te
neem in kwessies rakende intellektueel gestremdes. Hierdie individue moet nie
outomaties as onbevoeg beskou word nie, maar hul bevoegdheid moet eerder op 'n
individuele basis beoordeel word, inaggeneem die kompleksiteit van die besluit wat
geneem moet word. Voorts word daar van gesondheidsorgpersoneel verwag om
moeite te doen met die verkryging van oorwoê toestemming (waar moontlik) by
persone met intellektuele gestremdhede. Die toepassing van die beginsel van
respek vir outonomie op aspekte rakende reproduksie, lei tot die gevolgtrekking dat
persone met ernstige intellektuele gestremdhede nie in staat is om toestemming tot
seksuele omgang te verleen nie. Dus, is 'n vorm van paternalistiese beskerming in
hierdie gevalle aangedui. Persone met intellektuele gestremdhede wat egter wel
bevoeg is om toestemming tot seksuele omgang te verleen, moet nooit weerhou
word van voortplanting deur middel van onwillekeurige sterilisering nie. Inmenging
deur die staat in kwessies rakende reproduksie moet beperk word tot intervensies
waar (i) kinders ernstige skade berokken word en (ii) die beskerming van persone
wat onbevoeg is om toestemming tot seksuele interaksies met ander te verleen,
benodig word. Afgesien hiervan, is die intellektuele gestremde persoon geregtig op
dieselfde reproduktiewe regte as alle ander landsburgers.
|
|---|
