• 재활복지
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.1-30
• /
• 2018

This paper attempts to explore the place of human and disability rights from the perspective of Social Welfare within the context of the UN Disability Rights Convention of 2006. The overall discussion is focused especially upon the situations of human and disability rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) as it is being challenged to drastically address the issues of human rights in general, and disability rights in particular. The UN Disability Rights Convention challenges every ratified State party to commence legal reforms, legal harmonization, and policy and program developments to implement the Convention. Both North and South Korea are not exceptions to this. Even without drawing upon the UN's the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the dire situation of human rights in North Korea is well documented. However, this paper does not assume South Korea's human rights are any way superior to that of North Korea. This paper spells out areas for further action common to two Koreas and to any other nations for that matter. Apart from the general discussion on disability rights, the distinctive contribution of this paper lies in the fact that it has endeavored to draw upon any latest information and data on North Korea. It relied on various sources from UN and also from North Korea itself. One can note that North Korean disability authorities are making strenuous efforts to improve human rights of persons with disabilities in their desires to seek assistance from outside. It also shows an enormous need for international cooperation in seeking financial and material supports. This paper notes the latest political development between North and South Korea in taking "phased" steps for peace and stability as a positive sign for North and South Koreans' DPOs collaboration under the banner of International Cooperation of the article 32 of the UN Disability Rights Convention. More critically, this paper points to the further need to improve the overall data bases to ensure balanced legal reforms, policy developments and sharpen the areas of international collaboration.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.209-279
• /
• 2016

The Korean Mental Health Act was amended 2016 overall. This paper examines and evaluates the old Korean Mental Health Act since 1995 and the new Korean Mental Health Promotion Act 2016 from the Perspective of Human Rights and Inclusion of Persons with Psychosocial Disabilities. The persons with mental disabilities was separated and ruled out from society by the enactment of the Mental Health Act in 1995 and five times amendment. That has been justified and institutionally supported by medical viewpoint. The medical approach which reconsider the persons with mental disabilities as patients conceal that the aims of the involuntary admission in Mental Hospital are protection of society and the relief of the family member's duty of support for person with mental disabilities. This is institutionally supported in the 1995 Korean Mental Health Act by involuntary admission through the consent of family members as protectors. According to the old Act, the family members as protectors are authorized to consent to involuntary admission of persons with mental disabilities. Also, the psychiatrist that diagnoses the person with mental disabilities and evaluates the need for treatment by admission is not impartial in this decision. Family members as protectors may want to lighten their burden of support for the person with mental disabilities in their home by admitting them into a mental hospital, and the psychiatrist in the mental hospital can be improperly influenced by demand of hospital management. Additionally, Article 24 of the Korean Mental Health Act for the Involuntary Admission by the Consent of Family Members as Protector might violate personal liberty, as guaranteed in the Korean Constitution. The Mental Health Promotion Law was amended to reduce the scope of the persons with mental illness which are subject to forced hospitalization and to demand that a second diagnosis is made by another psychiatrist and screening by the committee concerning the legitimacy of admission in the process of the involuntary admission by the consent of family members as a method of protection. The amended Mental Health Promotion Law will contribute to reducing the number of the involuntary admissions and the inclusion of persons with mental disabilities. But if persons with mental disabilities are not providing some kind of service to the community, the amended Mental Health Promotion Law does not work for Inclusion of them.