Document Type

Article

Publication Title

Yale Law Journal

Abstract

This Note takes the position that the incorporation of international human rights standards into asylum claims gives needed shape to this currently amorphous standard by focusing on one of the greatest threats facing lesbian and gay refugees: involuntary "medical" intervention. Although current asylum law accepts the use of international human rights instruments in establishing persecution, practitioners rarely invoke them in proceedings. Drawing on the example of involuntary "medical" treatment, I hope to demonstrate how international human rights standards can be employed effectively, and thus to encourage their expanded use in this part of the adjudicatory process. Part I of this Note traces the doctrinal history of incorporating international human rights principles into asylum determinations of persecution. It details the judicial and legislative acceptance of this method and the possibilities for future extension. Part II argues that subjecting lesbian and gay persons to involuntary "medical" intervention violates the Nuremberg Code's international human rights standards. Part III argues that human rights standards under the Helsinki Accord independently proscribe forced "medical" sexual orientation interventions. In future cases, if sexual orientation asylum applicants establish that the treatment they fear is a violation of international human rights standards, the second prong's persecution requirement should be considered fulfilled and asylum granted.

First Page

255

DOI

https://doi.org/10.2307/797145

Volume

105

Publication Date

1995

Download

Share

COinS