Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I believe that one of ours is in this group. We are just getting our heads around this. Our amendment touches on the same point. The amendments are interrelated.

The term "protected person" was a substantial topic of conversation in the community of people working with persons with disabilities. Were we not to change the term, we would create a new category of person where there does not need to be one. It is not a neutral term and further stigmatises people with a disabilities. When we consider such issues, we should be cognisant of the fact that existing laws on sexual abuse, attack, rape and so on apply to everyone. This section is creating a new category in respect of people with intellectual disabilities that is not fully reflective of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. We need to eliminate discrimination in that regard, but if we keep the term, we will not do that.

Our amendment tries to limit the clause to only what is needed to provide protection against exploitation and abuse without unduly interfering with a person's right to have a relationship of his or her choice. This is a human rights approach, which would be better. It covers all citizens, including those with intellectual disabilities, who have the right to make choices just as everyone else does. It is about trying to get a balance. It is in that context that we are opposing the current section 20 and trying to replace it with our wording so as to address abuses of authority and exploitation.