riporto due testi dalla conf "la mano sul cappello". Mi sembra che a pochi giorni dalla conferenza sulla donna a Pechino sarebbe utile una presa di posizione sia del PR che del movimento dei club Pannella, per le rispettive aree di intervento.

***** 877 4-Giu-95,20:47,J.Fischetti,IT,Porcia_(PN

Eugenetica

tratto dal "Corriere della Sera" del 4 giugno 1995

Quel feto non è sano: aborto per legge

Pechino - Parole come "miglioramento della razza" sono scomparse dalla versione definitiva della nuova legge cinese sulla "maternità", ma la sostanza è rimasta quella. Il parlamento ha deciso: obbligatori i controlli prenatali, obbligatorio l'aborto in caso di malformazione del feto, obbligatoria la sterilizzazione per le donne handicappate e per le mogli di uomini handicappati.

Le proteste dei comitati per i diritti civili hanno prodotto solo un cambiamento nella forma linguistica. La durezza della legge eugenetica è assoluta. Come quasi tutto nella nuova Cina in corsa verso il capitalismo la spiegazione del provvedimento è essenzialmente economica. Ci sono 50 milioni di cinesi "pazzi e subnormali", quasi la popolazione dell'Italia, e costano troppo.

Scuole speciali, ospedali riabilitativi, assistenza domiciliare sono praticamente sconosciuti. La segregazione è già la regola. Ma da oggi il numero dei malformati deve ridursi drasticamente e con esso i costi sostenuti dallo Stato. Un funzionario della commissione per la Pianificazione familiare giustifica il provvedimento come un "contributo alla serenità e felicità delle famiglie". Ma per gli osservatori internazionali la norma mantiene tutto il sapore nazista e di costruzione di una razza eletta.

Nel 1970 la crescita della popolazione era del 25 per mille ed è precipitata all'11 per mille nel 1993. Un successo ottenuto grazie alla legge che impone un solo figlio per coppia. Ora quel figlio deve essere pure sano, pena la morte. Sarà anche questo un "successo"?

********************

A parte ogni considerazione sull'insieme del provvedimento, e basta ripercorrere questa conferenza per trovare vari interventi sull'argomento, mi ha colpito, fra le altre cose, che sia prevista la sterilizzazione obbligatoria per le donne con disabilità e per le donne sposate con uomini con disabilità. Non era più semplice e ovvio sterilizzare questi ultimi? Anche in Cina c'è il culto e il tabù della fertilità maschile? Meglio l'India, allora.

John

***** 993 24-Ago-95,14:21,-J.Fischetti,IT,Porcia_(PN

Legge eugenetica in Cina

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE HUMAN RIGHTS ACTION NETWORK (AAASHRAN)

China -- PASSAGE OF DISCRIMINATORY EUGENICS LAW

CASE NUMBER: CH9434

ISSUES: Right to marry and form a family; Right to life; Right to security of person

FACTS OF THE CASE: On 27 October 1994, in an attempt to "upgrade the general qualities" of its population, the Standing Committee of the Chinese People's Congress adopted a law designed to limit "inferior births." Scheduled to take effect on 1 June 1995, the "Maternal and Infant Health Care Law" states that when "either one of a couple preparing for marriage is found to be in the infective stage of a legally contagious disease or at the pathogenic stage of a relevant mental disorder . . . the couple should postpone marriage." While several of the contagious diseases and mental disorders referred to are treatable, many are currently incurable. Carriers of these diseases would thus be prohibited from marrying. In cases where either prospective partner is diagnosed with having a "serious hereditary disease," the couple may marry only "if they agree ito take long-lasting contraceptive measures or give up child bearing by undergoing ligation."

In addition, when "a doctor discovers or suspects childbearing couples of contracting serious hereditary diseases," the couple "should take appropriate measures based on the doctor's [recommendation]." If the fetus should be found to "have contracted serious hereditary diseases," or "have serious deformity," or if the continuation of the pregnancy will "endanger the life of pregnant women or seriously harm their health" the doctor "should give a medical opinion on terminating the pregnancy." While ambiguities in translation make it unclear whether the word "should" indicates a requirement that the pregnancy be terminated, it is clear that the law invites this interpretation on the part of the local and regional officials who will enforce it.

Doctors in Tibet and the Guangzhou Province, where this program has already been instituted, have routinely been coerced into performing abortions, sterilizations and infanticide in compliance with this and other population control laws. Doctors who have refused to perform such operations have often faced harsh sanctions, including stiff fines, dismissal from employment and the loss of political rights. In some cases, the spouses of doctors also have been punished in this manner.

The cited policies also would require medical personnel to take actions inconsistent with their moral and ethical responsibilities that have been globally acknowledged, including the following:

The World Medical Association, Inc., International Code of Medical Ethics, adopted by the 3rd General Assembly in October 1949, which states:

- A physician shall respect the rights of patients, of colleagues, and of other health professionals and shall safeguard patient confidences; and

- A physician shall act only in the patients interest when providing medical care which might have the effect of weakening the physical and mental condition of the patient.

The World Medical Association, Inc., Declaration of Geneva, adopted in 1948, stating:

- The health of my patient will be the first consideration; and

- I will maintain the utmost respect for human life from its beginning even under threat and I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity.

The World Medical Association, Inc., Statement on Family Planning, adopted in June 1969:

- The objective of family planning is the enrichment of human life, not its restriction...Parents should have the knowledge and the means to plan their families, and the opportunity to decide the number and spacing of children as a basic human right;

In addition, the limitations on the ability to marry and have children and the mandatory surgical procedures involved in the Maternal and Infant Health Care Law constitute serious violations of international human rights standards including basic protections provided by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Among the relevant provisions are the following:

Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted without objection by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948): o the right to life, liberty and security of person (Article 3); o the right to marry and found a family (Article 16); o the right to special care and assistance in motherhood and childhood (Article 25(2)); and the right to enjoyment of these rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind including sex and birth (Article 2).

Under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (ratified by China on 4 November 1980): o the responsibility of the State to eliminate discrimination against women in all matters relating to marriage and family relations and to ensure the right to enter into marriage and the right to decide freely and responsibly the number and spacing of their children (Article 16(1 [a] & [e])).

RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send telexes, telegrams, faxes, or airmail letters:

o expressing concern that the Maternal and Infant Health Care Law constitutes a violation of the right to life, liberty and security of person and the right to marry and found a family; and o requesting that the law be repealed or amended so that it no longer places limitations on the rights to marry freely and bear children or mandates or forces doctors to perform unwanted operations.

(Sources of information on this case include The Center for Reproductive Law & Policy, The British Medical Journal, Vol 309, 19 November 1994, The Lancet, Vol 344, 19 November 1994, National Affairs, 1 November 1994.)

APPEAL AND INQUIRY MESSAGES SHOULD BE SENT TO:

Premier of the State Council, Li Peng Zongli, Guowuyuan, 9 Xihuangchengenbeijie, Beijingshi, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

[Salutation: Your Excellency]

(Telexes: 716 210070 FMPRC CN; 716 22478 MFERT CN) (Telegrams: Premier Li Peng, Beijing, China) (Faxes: 011 86 1 512 5810 (via Ministry of Foreign Affairs))

Minister of Health of the People's Republic of China, Chen Minzhang, Buzhang, Minister of Health, Weishengbu, 44 Houhai Beiyan, Gulou Xidajie, Beijingshi, People's Republic of China

[Salutation: Your Excellency]

Copies of your appeals should be sent to:

China Desk Officer, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20520

Drew Liu, The China Institute, 1869 Park Road, NW, Washington, DC 20010

Richard Dicker, Human Rights in China, 485 Fifth Avenue, 3rd Floor, New York City, New York 10017

Please send copies of your appeals, and any responses you may receive, or direct any questions you may have to Elisa Munoz, AAAS Science and Human Rights Program, 1333 H St. NW, Washington, DC 20005; tele:(202)326-6797;

E-Mail: EMUNOZ@AAAS.ORG on the Internet System; fax:(202)289-4950. The keys to effective appeals are to be: courteous and respectful; accurate and precise;

impartial in approach; and as specific as possible regarding alleged violations and the international human rights standards and instruments that apply to the situation. Reference to your scientific organization and professional affiliation are always helpful.

To ensure that appeals are current and credible, please do not continue to write appeals on this case after 90 days from date of posting unless an update has been issued.

--- MMMR v4.10c beta * Gutta cavat lapidem