A/67/227 a cognitive or learning disability.25 Cross-examinations may involve trick questions, hypothetical questioning, and “leading and lengthy” questions with double negative phrasing, which are often confusing to people with and without a cognitive disability.25 Furthermore, owing to the mode of questioning, people with intellectual disabilities may give the answers that they think will satisfy the interrogator.25 It has been suggested that judges should more actively intervene in proceedings to encourage clearer communication and that support services should be offered to witnesses with a cognitive disability to ensure that they can navigate the trial process.25 45. Courthouses and police stations may also not have the resources necessary to ensure that witnesses with disabilities have the ability to adequately communicate with the police or to access information. During initial police questioning for example, sign language interpreters may not be readily accessible to assist women. Information may not be available in Braille or other alternative formats. 27 Furthermore, information about legal rights is often not provided in formats that are clear, easy to understand and use plain language, thus preventing women with disabilities who have limited reading skills from understanding their rights.27 In such circumstances, acts of violence against women with disabilities will remain unpunished. 46. Stereotypical views of women with disabilities may be imposed on their parental rights or through the termination of parental rights. According to Women with Disabilities Australia, it is relatively common for everyday stereotypes and deeply rooted beliefs about women with disabilities to be legitimized in family court and used against them in a divorce hearing or custody trial. Due to such prejudices, many women have lost custody and even visitation rights with their children. 47. Though disability laws may prohibit discrimination in social services, these laws do not always extend to child custody and protection proceedings. 28 As a result, divorce proceedings and child custody hearings may focus on the mother’s disability as opposed to her parenting behaviour, thereby implicitly equating parental disability with parental unfitness.28 48. Also, women with disabilities may experience greater regulation and prejudice by social service agencies.28 Thus the child’s “best interests” may be seen as primary to, and at odds with, the maternal rights of women with disabilities. 29 According to the Guide for Creating Legislative Change, women with a psychosocial, developmental or intellectual disability may be at particular risk of greater regulation and termination of parental rights. 49. Fear of unjustified termination of parental rights may cause women with disabilities to remain in abusive relationships. The denial of legal capacity, which includes restrictions on the right of women with disabilities to testify in the courts, the failures of the justice system to respond to the abuse of women and girls with disabilities, and/or the inability to see them as credible witnesses, perpetuates and __________________ 27 28 29 12 Stephanie Ortoleva, “Inaccessible justice: human rights, persons with disabilities and the legal system”, International Law Society of America, Journal of International and Comparative Law (2011). Dyer, Servais, Grover, Stansfield, Holland and Clare (see footnote 17 above). Phyllis Chesler, Mothers on Trial: the Battle for Children and Custody (1985). 12-45120