Senate hearing to vote on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was rescheduled for July 26

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s vote on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) was cancelled and tentatively rescheduled for July 26th. A group that supports home schooling has been successful in raising concerns about the CRPD. However, their concerns appear to be based on a misreading of the treaty. During the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on July 12, Senators were assured that the treaty would not impact parental rights. The Arc continues to work with numerous other disability advocacy groups to garner support for ratifying the treaty.

4 thoughts on “Senate hearing to vote on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was rescheduled for July 26

  1. I wanted to respond to The Arc’s statements about the UN CRPD.

    Consider this analogy: A school district writes an IEP with a vague goal that says “address speech and language delays.” At the IEP meeting, the school district assures the parent that, to address this, they will provide 30 minutes of speech therapy three times a week. The parent, trusting the school district’s assurances, does not worry that the actual language in the IEP is non-specific.

    Two months later, the student is not receiving the therapy promised. The school is now saying they are addressing the speech and language “in the classroom” after having provided a consultation with a SLP, and that the IEP requires no more. The parents contact an advocate, who wisely advises them that they should have insisted the language in their child’s IEP reflected the assurances of the school district. The parents request a new IEP meeting, and hire an attorney that specializes in education law to ensure the language in the new IEP is modified in a way that protects their child’s services.

    As advocates, I know that The Arc understands how important it is that assurances are put in black and white.

    Despite The Arc’s statement that opponents appear to be misreading the treaty, Dr. Michael Farris was the only person to testify that is an ~expert in international law~. When the only expert raises concerns about the language in the treaty, any well-intended “assurances” (by those who are not experts in international law) need to be viewed carefully – especially when those making the “assurances” are unwilling to address the actual language to reflect their statements.

    You might also be interested to know that other groups (besides the “home schooling” group) are also opposed to the CRPD. Earlier today, Teresa Citro, CEO of Learning Disabilities Worldwide, Inc., added her name to the coalition letter opposing U.S. ratification of the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities. Other organizations who have formally opposed the treaty include:

    Eagle Forum; The Weyrich Lunch; Family Research Council Action; CitizenLink; Concerned Women for America; Tradition, Family, Property, Inc.; Liberty Counsel; Liberty Center for Law and Policy; Liberty Counsel Action; Religious Freedom Coalition; American Principles in Actions; Preserve Innocence Initiative; Council for America;; Let Freedom Ring; American Association of Christian Schools; Federal Intercessors; The Conservative Caucus; and Patriot Voices.

    I hope that The Arc will take an “advocate’s look” at the concerns that have been raised about the actual language of the treaty and ask why those offering “assurances” are unwilling to acknowledge the problems with the wording in this legally binding document.


    (Mother two public school IEP students).

    • Hi Jodi,

      Thank you so much for your thoughts on this. We always appreciate feedback. We’ve sent your comment to appropriate staff.

      Thanks again for taking the time to read the CI Blog and comment.

  2. Pingback: KEEP UP THE FIGHT: CALL your SENATOR TODAY on the CRPD (The DISABILITIES TREATY!)! | Virginia Right!

  3. Thank you, Jody! That is exactly right and that is what happens all the time.

    I am trying to get the word out about what the CRPD and its long term consequences. I believe the consequences for ratifying the CRPD are more grave than realized within the limits of our own country. I hope that you will listen to my point of view and, if I am wrong, correct me. Anyway, I know that much of this is redundant, but I thank you in advance for reading.

    The CRPD stands for The Convention of Rights of Person’s with Disabilities. It is a treaty that is going to be voted on in the Senate to be ratified soon. I have done my own research and am horrified that we would even consider this. Basically, it is the same as The Convention on the Rights of a Child. However, it is giving the UN/government control over what is in the “best interests” of the disabled and disabled children. It supersedes any of our own fundamental rights like the right to self-govern, our laws and Constitution. And instead of “We the People” it gives further control over to government to do what “it” thinks is best.

    It scares me, because Hitler didn’t just come to power overnight doing his atrocities. People really believed in change and the “best for the Motherland”. It wasn’t about killing people, but about success, improvement and a better way of life. If the people of the country were looking at long term consequences of their ideology, how many do you think would have stopped it before it got out of hand?

    What is defined best by government is not always what is best for individuals. Eugenics is a good example. Belgium is one of the countries that adopted the UN treaties. Their doctors get to decide to kill children under the age of 1, if the doctor believes the child will suffer in life because of a disability. No joke. Parents can protest, but to no avail. This is not unlike what Hitler did. At first the disabled were taken care of and put in homes, and then they were given “merciful deaths.” In Sweden, it is a “child’s right” to childcare outside the family home. It is expected that families place their children in childcare by the age of 1. If you home school in Sweden, you can look forward to being hunted down and your children taken. This is just the tip of the iceberg. I cannot think of a time in history where once government gained a foothold in “human rights” that it ever let go of its prey. Human rights were defined no longer by individuals, but by the few on top who ruled. Where does it stop once you have lost your rights of personal choice? And is it really “human rights” at the end of the day or a way to sugarcoat another person’s beliefs that you will be forced to live by? Before we know it, we will have lost all that we have, by trying to do good, and only a few will have gained in the end.

    I believe in families, kids, parents and individuals. It really saddens me to see our freedoms and way of life slip away. More and more governmental control only leads to oppression and suppression, even if it was started with good intentions.

    Article 7 of the CRPD states:

    1. STATES PARTIES shall take all necessary measures to ensure the full enjoyment by children with disabilities of all human rights and fundamental freedoms on an equal basis with other children.

    2. In all actions concerning children with disabilities, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.

    3. STATES PARTIES shall ensure that children with disabilities have the right to express their views freely on all matters affecting them, their views being given due weight in accordance with their age and maturity, on an equal basis with other children, and to be provided with disability and age-appropriate assistance to realize that right.

    There is no consideration in this article for parental rights and it states that “in ALL actions…the best interests of the child shall be the PRIMARY consideration.” And who is going to be considering what is in the best interest of my child? The government or “STATES PARTIES”. My child shall also “… be provided with disability and age-appropriate assistance to realize that right.” That means government shall undermine and take over the parents roll to “provide” the “assistance to realize that right.” However, I still believe it is a fundamental right and the job of a parent to decide what is in the best interest of a child and to GUIDE their child. What is a parent without this right?

    No one knows a child like a parent. A parent sees the small things that add up to big things in a child’s life. We make it our priority. Each child is different and every family is different. Every child in each family is different. I know that we have to take unique things into consideration with each child in our family when deciding what is needed for our child’s success and happiness. THERE WILL NEVER BE A ONE SIZE FITS ALL.

    How can a government begin to monitor and “ensure” the “enjoyment” of those with disabilities to be equal to others without establishing precedence for it? Firm standards would need to be established requiring defined rights, best interests and happiness of those with disabilities and those without. Thus, our freedom and liberty of which we once knew will fade into nonexistence in light of a governmental controlled and defined definition of “rights” and “happiness” and “best interests”; a one-size-fits-all cliche. And it would require a plan for everyone to conform and the government would have the right to take all necessary steps to ensure that it happens.

    A government does not consider differences in each child, individual or family and no one will do as much for our kids as we, the parents, will. The CRPD will require my kids to conform to what the GOVERNMENT thinks they need and this will not make my kids happy. Nor will this be the best thing for them. The CRPD is supposed to help secure the “fundamental freedoms” of those with disabilities, yet it can’t even protect the “fundamental freedoms” already established. No bureaucrat or politician beliefs should take precedence over a parent when it comes to a child. Please do not give anyone the right to overstep this boundary. It is not what is going to help our children, families or individual freedom.

    I believe this issue touches all our lives and no matter our beliefs or situation in life. I believe that just like opening the door with the government in deciding what is needed to “protect us”, it leaves unchecked power and will leave the people of the US with privileges to be doled out with permission instead of liberty. The government taking control of our “best interests” will render us powerless and it will supersede our right to individual freedom, religious freedom, freedom of speech and the right to self-govern.

    Please help stop this treaty and spread the word. But whatever you decide or your beliefs, thank you for reading and for considering the future of America.

    Amanda Mitchell

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: