How true it is that the USA is not ratifying the CEDAW?

Question

CEDAW: Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination.

A friend told me this, if this is true the USA is among the few other countries that will not ratify this as well as other notorious women's right abusers like Sudan, Somalia and Iran.

Do you have any more information about this, and IF it is true how do you feel about it?

Answer 1

Perhaps it is because the U.S. does not want to vote for a one world government where one solution must fit every situation.

Edit:

Why don't you question it's effectiveness?. Numerous countries that continue to abuse women's rights are long standing members.

Answer 2

It is indeed true.  The U.S. is embarrassingly the only developed nation in the west to not have yet ratified this declaration.  Below is the CEDAW website listing the member states.  From Amnesty International, here are the current reasons, stated as myths and facts, why the U.S. refuses to ratify this declaration:

"By not ratifying CEDAW, the U.S. remains in the company of countries like Iran and the Sudan, where women's rights are in a deplorable state. Hesitancy to ratify this important document stems from unfounded fears associated with the implementation of CEDAW in the U.S. Some myths about the treaty are addressed below:

MYTH #1: U.S. ratification of CEDAW would give too much power to the international community with the provisions of the Convention superseding U.S. federal and state law.

FACT: Treaties adopted in the United States are not "self-executing." This means that legislation to implement any treaty provision would come before the House and Senate in the same way any other bill does. As with many international agreements, countries can express "reservations, understandings and declarations" in cases where there are discrepancies between the international convention or treaty and domestic law. U.S. law generally complies with the requirements of CEDAW and the Treaty is compatible with the principles of the U.S. Constitution. Where any differences do exist, the Treaty calls on states to take appropriate measures to progressively promote the principle of nondiscrimination. Such language upholds US sovereignty and grants no enforcement authority to the United Nations.

MYTH #2: "Discrimination" is too broadly defined in CEDAW, and its implementation in the U.S. would result in unwise laws and "frivolous" lawsuits.

FACT: The treaty is not self-executing and would not authorize any lawsuit not already allowed under U.S. law. While implementation of CEDAW could raise U.S. legal standards, a flurry of frivolous lawsuits is unlikely. CEDAW's definition of discrimination includes both discrimination that is intentional and that which is the result of laws, policies, and practices. When applied, these provisions have the impact (sometimes unintentionally) of discriminating against women. U.S. law already governs discrimination in public and private employment, prohibiting policies and practices that unintentionally burden women more than men. Regardless, claims in the U.S. related to s*x discrimination are not subjected to the same "strict scrutiny" standards applied to claims of race discrimination. The implementation of CEDAW could help to rectify these discrepancies in U.S. law over time, but is unlikely to result in frivolous lawsuits any more than challenges to race discrimination.

MYTH #3: CEDAW will be used to destroy the traditional family structure in the U.S. by redefining "family" and the respective roles of men and women, or could be used to usurp the proper role of parents in child rearing.

FACT: CEDAW does not seek to regulate any constitutionally protected interests with respect to family life. Both CEDAW and the U.S. Constitution recognize the restraints of any governing authority to interfere with an individual's most basic decisions regarding family. CEDAW simply urges State Parties "to adopt education and public information programs, which will eliminate prejudices and current practices that hinder the full operation of the principle of the social equality of women." The treaty simply calls for the recognition of the "common responsibility of men and women in the upbringing and development of their children" and maintains "the parents' common responsibility (is) to promote what is in the best interest of the child."

MYTH #4: CEDAW supports abortion through its promotion of access to "family planning."

FACT: CEDAW does not address the matter of abortion and, according to the U.S. State Department, is "abortion neutral." Many countries in which abortion is illegal - such as Ireland, Burkina Faso, and Rwanda - have ratified the Convention.

MYTH #5: The treaty will threaten single-s*x schools and require "gender-neutral" textbooks.

FACT: Single-s*x schools are not prohibited. Educational equality language refers to the need for equal educational facilities, texts, and other materials for girls and boys, whether they are taught in single-s*x or co-ed schools.

MYTH #6: U.S. ratification of CEDAW might be used to sanction same-s*x marriages.

FACT: The CEDAW Treaty makes clear that it is not aimed at all s*x-based discrimination, but only at discrimination that is directed specifically against women. A same-s*x marriage claim would include a charge that both men and women who want to marry individuals of their own s*x are being discriminated against. There is no provision in theTreaty that would compel the U.S. Congress to pass same-s*x marriage laws in order to comply.

MYTH #7: The treaty will require legalization of prostitution.

FACT: The CEDAW Committee has called for the decriminalization of prostitution in specific countries such as China, where prostitution and trafficking in women and children are rampant, not for all countries in general. Regulation in those countries would allow victimized women to come forward without fear of repercussions, to seek treatment to prevent HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections, to obtain health care and education, and to combat trafficking and s*x slavery.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/Ratify_the_Tre...

Answer 3

If that doesn't have an Orwellian ring to it, I just don't know what does.

Edit: Women  in the US already have a bill of rights: http://www.constitution.org/billofr_.htm

Answer 4

You're including the US with countries that openly discriminate against women?  I thought you had more sense than that.

The US already has plenty of things to protect women here.  We don't need to sign some UN thing (I'm assuming this comes from the UN).  If other countries were as great as some people act on here, they wouldn't have to have something like this to tell them to give women equal rights either.

The US, unlike most countries, doesn't see the need to answer to some corrupt organization that thinks it controls everything.  I won't say everything's perfect here, but I generally trust my own government more than another one, and that says a lot since I don't really trust the US government much either.

Answer 5

Correction : CEDAW = Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination AGAINST WOMEN

The US signed but did not ratify CEDAW as well as the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (and possibly others) because it wasn't entirely necessary.

As you mentioned, other States that have not ratified CEDAW include such human rights violators as Sudan and Somalia, and CEDAW was meant for these uber-violators. The US already has a strong policy on gender equality, therefore it doesn't need to ratify CEDAW, because it would be redundant. The US already does all of the things called for in CEDAW, and because of technical reasons and loopholes, if the US ratified CEDAW, we would actually be going backwards in gender equality because the US has already surpassed the demands of CEDAW. Basically, CEDAW asks for less than the US already does. It was meant for States with much more problems in human rights and gender equality,  so the US doesn't need to ratify because although what we are doing is not exactly what CEDAW recommends, it is still in accordance with and not in violation of CEDAW.

Does that make sense?

Answer 6

The US signed but didn't ratify.

I'm fine with it. The USA does enough to protect its female citizens.

http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_...

Answer 7

It seems that when the words "International" and "women" are involved, the US Congress has a difficult time approving the proposal. CEDAW has been around a long time (27 years) and the US Congress comes up with these stupid reasons why we won't ratify it (usually they refuse to even consider voting on it). Even if our laws our superior to what CEDAW proposed (which they are not), it would be a step in the right direction to join the rest of the world, including those in Europe, who have also ratified the treaty.

According to NOW, in the US, some women's rights advocates are promoting adoption of resolutions by state legislatures, city or county councils in support of CEDAW ratification at the federal level. Learn more about this process from International Women's Rights Action Watch: http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/iwraw/

Answer 8

Uhhh, what does ratifying mean? Sorry.

Its early morning where i live, brain isn't working yet. I'm assuming it means they are approving it? Sponsoring it?