Debate contribution: United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Debate contribution by Mrs Diane Dodds on 25 November 2024.

MLA

Mrs Diane Dodds

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

25 November 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4675248

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am glad to support the amendment. I take issue with the Member who spoke previously: this is not a cynical intervention. If we are serious about protecting people with disabilities, we will be serious about protecting them from when they are preborn through to their final breath. A society will always be judged on how it protects its most vulnerable. I am glad that the DUP is a pro-life party and that we take a view on issues regarding life and the sanctity of life. We support the right to life from the womb right to the final breath. Therefore, the conversation in the Chamber today is important. Our amendment, in that context, is equally important, clearly outlining our view that all life, including that of those who have a disability, is important. Our amendment focuses on the issue of

"selective abortion on the grounds of fetal impairment".

It vexes me greatly that Northern Ireland, once the safest place for the preborn, is now one of the most dangerous for the preborn in Europe. That vexes me greatly. The UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has stated that the abortion of children because of a disability violates the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The Committee declared:

"Laws which explicitly allow for abortion on grounds of impairment violate the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Art,. 4,5,8)."

The Committee further explained that such abortion is often based on an inaccurate diagnosis and that:

"Even if it is not false, the assessment perpetuates notions of stereotyping disability as incompatible with a good life."

Yes, I will.

I understand that the Member is pro-choice. That is your right and your choice. I am firmly on the side of the children who are in the womb: those who are preborn and have the right to life. In all of these issues, we must consider the right to life of the mother and the child.

I absolutely agree. I also do not want to see this descend into any kind of angry debate. It is a really important issue for us to consider. I am, however, firmly of the belief that both lives matter. That is hugely important to me. I am also interested in this debate in the context of the debate that will take place later this week in our national Parliament. The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has taken a stand against the so-called right to euthanasia, which, according to it:

"perpetuates stereotypes about severely impaired people suffering and being better off dead."

I know that supporters of the Bill in London will point out that it is about people with a terminal diagnosis and that very tight timelines are involved, but I point out that, in every jurisdiction in which such legislation has been introduced, it has been gradually widened and widened so that it includes for consideration a very wide variety of conditions. The legislation in Canada is a — I was going to say "good example" — terrible example of such legislation. Clearly, protections in the Bill that will be discussed on Friday are not adequate. Some are already seeking to widen the Bill so that it includes the notion of intolerable suffering. To me, that is simply intolerable. I also reinforce the view of disability rights campaigner Tanni Grey-Thompson. She clearly said about the debate in Parliament this week that there is a real fear for people with disabilities. She expressed fears about the lack of protections and raised issues to do with coercion of the most vulnerable at a most vulnerable time in their life. I conclude my short contribution —

— by saying that I think —.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.

629 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:40 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification