CEDAW in the Eyes of the United States

Open access

Abstract

Despite the large number of reservations registered by Member countries, making it one of the, if not the, most heavily reserved human rights treaties; the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) has managed to achieve a very high rate of states’ membership [1]. Currently, 187 countries out of the 193 United Nations Members are parties to CEDAW [2]. What is strange to digest, however, is the fact that the United States is one of the seven countries that are yet to ratify the Convention [3]. This article provides an insight into the position of the United States from the ratification of CEDAW. It examines the merits of arguments made for and against the ratification and their rationale to provide a better understanding that explains what is considered by many as a buzzling stand of the United States from the Convention.

Bibliography

  • 1. Concerned for Women Legislative Action Committee, “CEDAW Harms Families”, May 7, 2010, Beverly LaHaye Institute, https://concernedwomen.org/cedaw-harmsfamilies/, viewed on 2/10/2017.

  • 2. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by the General Assembly Resolution 34/180 December 1979, entered into force on 3 September 1981, UN Treaty Series, Vol. 1249.

  • 3. Courtney Goldsworthy, “Why the United States Has Failed to Ratify the CEDAW: A Look at Purported Problems with Ratification”, Michigan State University, 2005.

  • 4. Christina Sommers, “Feminism by Treaty” Policy Review no. 167, (2011) 37-50.

  • 5. David Auerswald, and Maltzman Forrest, “Policymaking Through Advice and Consent: Treaty Consideration by the United States Senate.” Journal of Politics, Vol. 65 (4), 2003.

  • 6. Devaki Jain, Women, Development, and the UN: A Sixty-Year Quest for Equality and Justice, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2005.

  • 7. “Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW): Issues in the U.S. Ratification Debate.” Congressional Research Service, (2001), 7-5700.

  • 8. Ed Pilkington, “US criticized by UN for human rights failings on NSA, guns and drones”. The Guardian. April 2, 2014

  • 9. F.Martin, International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, Cambridge University Press, 2006.

  • 10. Jamil Dakwar, “U.S. Human Rights Record Undergoes International Scrutiny”. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), April 2, 2014.

  • 11. Julia Schast, “Battle of the Sexes: Why the United States Has Not Yet Ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)”, Elon University, http://www.elon.edu/eweb/academics/writing_excellence/contest/Contest%20Entry%20Schast%20Research%20Essay.xhtml, Viewed on 3/10/2017.

  • 12. Julie Minor, “An analysis of structural Weaknesses in the Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women”, 24 Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law, 137-153, (1997).

  • 13. Kavita Ramdas and Kelly Janus Kathleen, “Ratifying Women’s Rights.” Policy Review no. 169, 2011.

  • 14. Lynn Walter, Women’s Rights: A Global View, Westport: Greenwood Press, 2001.

  • 15. Malvina Halberstam, “The United States Ratification on the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women”, 31(1) George Washington Journal of International Law & Economy, 49-96, (1997).

  • 16. Penny Wakefield, “CEDAW Ratification: Back Seated Once Again “ Washington & Lee Law School Human Rights 37(3), 2010.

  • 17. Rebecca Cook, “State Accountability Under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, in Human Rights of Women: National and International Perspectives, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994.

  • 18. Report of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on its Eighteenth Session, General Assembly Official Records, Supplement No. 38 (A/ 53/ 38/ Rev.1), 1998.

  • 19. Report of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on its Twentieth Session, General Assembly Official Records, Supplement No. 38 (A/ 54/ 38/ Rev.1), 1999.

  • 20. Report of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on its Twenty Second Session, General Assembly Official Records, Supplement No. 38 (A/ 55/ 38), 2000.

  • 21. Report of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on its Twenty Fourth Session, General Assembly Official Records, Supplement No. 38 (A/ 56/ 38), 2001.

  • 22. Susan Yoshihara, “Does CEDAW Promote Abortion?”, Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute, 2010

  • 23. Thaler Kai, “50 years ago today, American diplomats endorsed mass killings in Indonesia. Here’s what that means for today”, The Washington Post, December 24, 2015.

  • 24. Todd Landman, Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study, Georgetown University Press, 2005.

  • 25. Trymaine Lee, “UN watchdog condemns US for human rights failures”. MSNBC, April 2, 2014.

  • 26. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division of Social Policy and Development, “International Norms and Standards Relating to Disability”, (2003-2004), http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/comp101.htm, Viewed on 3/10/2017.

  • 27. UN General Assembly, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), Resolution 34/180) December 18, 1979), General Recommendation 24.

  • 28. UN Report of the World Conference of the International Women’s Year, Mexico City, 19 June-2 July 1975.

  • 29. U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964).

  • 30. U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. 2002. “Treaty Doc. 96-53, “ Hearing before the Committee on Foreign Relations. 107th Congress, 2nd Session. U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington. http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate

  • 31. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, registered on 27 Jan 1969, entered into force on 27 Jan 1980, UN Treaty series, Vol. 1155.

  • 32. William Gould, Agenda for Reform: The Future of Employment Relationships and the Law, MIT Press, 1996.

Journal Information

Target Group experts in the field of Romanian Law

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 23 23 23
PDF Downloads 6 6 6