Internamiento Involuntario y Discapacidad Mental desde la óptica del Tribunal Constitucional y según La Convencion de los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2024-04-01
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
El presente trabajo académico tiene la finalidad de analizar algunos de los
últimos pronunciamientos del Tribunal Constitucional respecto del “internamiento
involuntario” de personas con discapacidad mental; tomando como base
principal la “Convención sobre los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad”
y la normativa peruana vigente. Como bien sabemos, la discriminación hacia
este grupo vulnerable ha sido y es una realidad inherente a las sociedades de
todo el mundo; y presente históricamente en diversos ámbitos de la vida de quien
la padece. Es mucho mayor, cuando hablamos de aquellos a los que se les ha
diagnosticado una enfermedad mental, pues sufren una mayor marginación
basada en estigmas y prejuicios que se tienen respecto de estas; como lo son el
que representan un “peligro para terceros”. Así, la restricción de su libertad
queda amparada con el propósito de garantizar la no afectación de los derechos
de los demás, olvidando que esas restricciones han dado paso a una serie de
abusos para con ellos y dejando de lado la protección de sus derechos humanos.
Asimismo, se ha podido advertir en las sentencias del Tribunal Constitucional la
lógica de asumir que las personas con discapacidad mental no están en la
capacidad de poder tomar decisiones ni siquiera respecto de un derecho tan
esencial como lo es el derecho a la salud; pues son “internadas” sin su
consentimiento y peor aún sin que si quiera se les realice la consulta respectiva
lo que niega su autonomía a poder determinarse. Y que inicia en la familia, pues
son estos los que se atribuyen el decidir por ellos amparándose en sesgos, que
como veremos también forman parte de la lógica que trasciende a nuestros
operadores de justicia; y que mellan en derechos que les asisten como lo son la
libertad, salud, integridad y dignidad humana.
The purpose of this academic paper is to analyze some of the latest judicial rulings issued by the Peruvian Constitutional Court regarding the “involuntary commitment” of people with mental disabilities, taking as its main basis the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” and current Peruvian regulations. As we well know, discrimination against this vulnerable group has been and is an inherent reality in societies around the world and historically present in various aspects of the life of those who suffer from it. It is much bigger when we talk about those who have been diagnosed with a mental illness, because they suffer marginalization based on stigmas and prejudices that exist around them, as they represent danger for others. Thus, the restriction of freedom of people with mental disabilities is allow with the purpose of guarantee that the rights of others don’t be affected. But, forgetting that these kinds of restriction unleash many types of abuses toward them unguarded and leaving aside the protection of their human rights. Also, it has been possible to notice in the rulings of the Peruvian Constitutional Court the logic that assume that people with mental disabilities have not the capacity to take their own decisions, even if it is related to an essential right like health. And that begins in the family because these are the ones who attribute the power of take decisions instead of them and this happen by the biases that exist there and in our justice operators and that affect their rights such as freedom, health, integrity, and human dignity.
The purpose of this academic paper is to analyze some of the latest judicial rulings issued by the Peruvian Constitutional Court regarding the “involuntary commitment” of people with mental disabilities, taking as its main basis the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” and current Peruvian regulations. As we well know, discrimination against this vulnerable group has been and is an inherent reality in societies around the world and historically present in various aspects of the life of those who suffer from it. It is much bigger when we talk about those who have been diagnosed with a mental illness, because they suffer marginalization based on stigmas and prejudices that exist around them, as they represent danger for others. Thus, the restriction of freedom of people with mental disabilities is allow with the purpose of guarantee that the rights of others don’t be affected. But, forgetting that these kinds of restriction unleash many types of abuses toward them unguarded and leaving aside the protection of their human rights. Also, it has been possible to notice in the rulings of the Peruvian Constitutional Court the logic that assume that people with mental disabilities have not the capacity to take their own decisions, even if it is related to an essential right like health. And that begins in the family because these are the ones who attribute the power of take decisions instead of them and this happen by the biases that exist there and in our justice operators and that affect their rights such as freedom, health, integrity, and human dignity.
Description
Keywords
Tribunales constitucionales--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Personas con discapacidad--Discriminación--Perú, Personas con discapacidad--Derechos humanos, Capacidad civil
Citation
Collections
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess