Author: Sara De Vido

The book explores the relationship between violence against women on one hand, and the rights to health and reproductive health on the other. It argues that violation of the right to health is a consequence of violence, and that (state) health policies might be a cause of – or create the conditions for – violence against women. It significantly contributes to feminist and international human rights legal scholarship by conceptualising a new ground-breaking idea, violence against women’s health (VAWH), using the Hippocratic paradigm as the backbone of the analysis. The two dimensions of violence at the core of the book – the horizontal, ‘interpersonal’ dimension and the vertical ‘state policies’ dimension – are investigated through around 70 decisions of domestic, regional and international judicial or quasi-judicial bodies (the anamnesis). The concept of VAWH, drawn from the anamnesis, enriches the traditional concept of violence against women with a human rights-based approach to autonomy and a reflection on the pervasiveness of patterns of discrimination (diagnosis). VAWH as theorised in the book allows the reconceptualisation of states’ obligations in an innovative way, by identifying for both dimensions obligations of result, due diligence obligations, and obligations to progressively take steps (treatment). The book eventually asks whether it is not international law itself that is the ultimate cause of VAWH (prognosis).

Open Access (free)
The narrative
Sara De Vido

University Press, 2014), chap. 1, and Oxford bibliography on the topic, www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo9780199796953/obo-9780199796953–0153.xml (last update 27 June 2017). 53 See, for example, Article 5(b) of the Maputo Protocol. Examples of national legislation are given at www.npwj.org/FGM/Status-african-legislations-FGM.html. 54 S. De Vido, ‘Culturally motivated crimes against women in a multicultural Europe. The case of criminalization of FGM in the 2011 CoE Istanbul Convention’, in L. Zagato and M. Vecco (eds), Citizens of Europe: Cultures and Rights

in Violence against women’s health in international law
Open Access (free)
‘Case history’ on violence against women, and against women’s rights to health and to reproductive health
Sara De Vido

favour of cultural relativism, but rather that courts need to demonstrate ‘multicultural sensitivity.’250 The US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, in Mohamed v. Gonzales, affirmed that there is no doubt that FGM amounts to persecution under US asylum law,251 and that Mohamed had been persecuted ‘on account of her membership to a social group,’ which the Court identified either as Somalian women, or more narrowly, as young girls in the Benadiri clan.252 According to the Court, ‘it was the only plausible construction.’253 It compared FGM to forced sterilisation, described

in Violence against women’s health in international law