I.V. v. Bolivia, Serie C No. 329, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 30 November 2016

Forced sterilization of a Peruvian woman without her full, prior and informed consent and without health benefits constitutes violation of her rights to dignity, personal freedom and integrity, private and family life, access to information and founding a family.

Art. 1 ACHR
Art. 5 ACHR
Art. 11 ACHR
Art. 13 ACHR
Art. 17 ACHR

1. Historically, a woman’s liberty and autonomy as regards her sexual and reproductive health has been limited, restricted or annulled, based on negative and prejudicial gender stereotypes. This is because, socially and culturally, men have been assigned a preponderant role in decision-making with regard to a woman’s body, and women have been seen, above all, as a reproductive entity. In particular, the Court notes that non-consensual sterilization was influenced by the historically unequal relationship between women and men. Even though sterilization was a contraceptive method used by both women and men, non-consensual sterilization affected women disproportionately, because they were women, and because society assigned the reproductive function and family planning to women.

2. Forced sterilization may hide negative or prejudicial gender stereotypes associated with health care services and result in legitimizing, normalizing or perpetuating non-consensual sterilizations that disproportionately affect women. The medical decision to perform the sterilization procedure without the applicant’s prior, free, full and informed consent was prompted by a logic of paternalist care and under the preconception that the sterilization had to be performed, even though her case was not urgent or a medical emergency, based on the idea that she would not take proper decisions in the future to avoid another pregnancy. The conduct, with the consequent impossibility to conceive, caused the applicant lasting physical and mental suffering, as well as considerable emotional pain, on a personal, family and social level.
(The applicant, a Peruvian refugee, was hospitalized due to pregnancy-related complications. Without giving consent, the applicant had her Fallopian tubes tied. The Court found that this constituted forced sterilization, amounting to multiple violations of the rights to personal freedom and integrity, dignity, private and family life, access to information and founding a family).