Credits: Image Digitally Generated with ChatGPT
By: María Paz Daza Carniglia
1. Introduction
Women bear a disproportionate burden as caregivers due to social gender roles. This reality contradicts the understanding that all human beings are equal and should be free from discrimination, conditioning women’s lives. It also affects their ability to enjoy and exercise their fundamental rights and development, reinforcing structural disadvantages and discrimination based on gender.
Beyond the human rights to equal treatment, dignity, health, privacy and family life, which are relevant when discussing care, it is noteworthy that the Human Rights Council (HRC/Council) adopted in 2023 a Resolution on the right to care, while, in January 2025, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights issued a report on the “Human rights dimension of care and support”. More recently, on 12 June 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) released an Advisory Opinion on the content and scope of the right to care and its interrelationship with other rights.
This reflection aims to unpack the dimensions of the right recognized by the documents previously mentioned and analyze them under gender lenses and broader considerations regarding care, to identify potential risks in the current formulation of this right.
2. Care as a right
The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) includes 30 “basic human rights”, but new rights have emerged since its adoption, including the right to live in a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, access to clean water and sanitation or adequate housing. The right to care was not initially considered in the UNDHR. However, the international community considers care and support a human rights matter.
In 2023, the HRC Resolution N°54/6 about the “Centrality of care and support from a human rights perspective” acknowledged: (i) the persistent discrimination against women and girls, and (ii) that children, persons with disabilities, and older persons are entitled to care and special assistance. The resolution also emphasized the burden carried by women as the main caregivers, highlighting the importance to recognizing and redistribute care work among individuals, families, communities, the private sector and States, as a necessary step to fulfill women’s rights, and gender equality (page 3).
The HRC’s Resolution N°54/6 para. 5 (a) also established the need to address human rights of women, persons with disabilities, children and older persons, pointing out three dimensions of the right: (i) caregivers’ rights, (ii) receivers of care and support, and (iii) caregivers’ self-care. The Council also mentioned that all these dimensions should be considered from a gender and human rights perspective.
The right to care finds expression in a range of international instruments. For instance, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes that children are entitled to special care (Article 25, para. 2), while the Convention of the Rights of the Child also establishes State’s obligations to ensure child’s protection and care (Article 3, para. 2). Although “care” is not explicitly mentioned, the right to care could also be implied in the State’s obligation to balance responsibilities of the spouses (Article 17 American Convention of Human Rights), the right to special protection in old age (Article 12 Inter-American Convention on Protecting the Human Rights of Older Persons), and the modification of cultural patterns based on stereotyped roles (Article 8 of the Convention Belém do Pará). Furthermore, the right to care has been part of the regional gender agenda from 1977. More recently, the right to care is enshrined in the Buenos Aires Agreement, which recognizes care as a right to both provide and receive care, as well to exercise self-care based on the principles of equality, universality and social and gender co-responsibility.
In the Inter-American system, in particular, a landmark Advisory Opinion of the IACtHR was issued in August of 2025, as earlier noted. It recognizes the right to care as an independent human right and the three aforementioned dimensions: (i) the right to receive care entails that all individuals who have a degree of dependency have the right to receive quality, sufficient and adequate care to live with dignity (para. 116), (ii) the right to provide care consists of the right to do so in conditions of dignity, on both in an unpaid and paid basis (para. 117), and (iii) the right to self-care is the right of caregivers and those who receive care to ensure their own well-being (para. 118).
In the Advisory Opinion, the Court recognizes the right to care as a right related to various rights contained in the American Convention, such as the right to life, personal integrity, health, family, childhood, personal liberty, honor and dignity, equality, work, and social security (paras. 100–106). However, in the Court’s view, a fragmented treatment of the right is insufficient and does not allow for it to be properly addressed (para. 112). While this blog analyzes the dimensions of the right interpreted by the Court, rather than the source of this human right, it is worth noting that its status as an autonomous right and its source within the international framework may be subject to discussion.
Regarding the European and African pronouncement on the right to care, it can be noted that it has been indirectly recognized under other norms that address issues such as maternity, social security, conditions of older persons, the best interests of the child, among others (Advisory Opinion paras. 82-87). To date, no other regional human rights system has explicitly recognized the right to care as an autonomous human right, making this Advisory Opinion a novel development that brings a new right.
3. Risks under the previous understanding
Two possible risks can arise from the previous understanding of the dimensions of the right to care, particularly the right to receive care:
a) Perpetuating care as dependency
In 2023, the Special Rapporteur on the Right of Persons with Disabilities issued the Report on the transformation of services for persons with disabilities. It highlighted the need to change from the concept of the 20th century welfare state model to a new philosophy of services and support, grounded in every person’s autonomy and social inclusion (para. 9). Moreover, it considered that services should not be based on concepts such as maintenance, care, or protection, but rather the autonomy of individuals.
However, the right to receive care, especially as interpreted in the Advisory Opinion of the IACtHR, understands that some people have a degree of dependency and their well-being must be guaranteed, rather than considering autonomy in the content of the right. The challenge lies in how this understanding aligns, for instance, with the perspective previously mentioned by the Special Rapporteur on the Right of Persons with Disabilities. The Advisory Opinion could reinforce or maintain a logic of dependency for people with disabilities, treating them as passive recipients of care. This approximation could even frame them as a “burden” for the family and society, instead of as rights holders (A/HRC/52/32, para. 28).
b) Reinforcing gender stereotypes
The Special Rapporteur also pointed out in Resolution A/HRC/55/56 how families absorbing supports responsibilities impacts the human rights of both persons with disabilities and their family members (para. 64). While it is necessary to provide conditions for all people to develop autonomously and enjoy their rights – and despite the IACtHR mentioning the gender and intersectionality – the “right to receive care” as presented can pose a gender-related risk. Overlooking the fact that women are primary caregivers, and thus the family members more affected by the unpaid work, may reinforce charitable and medicalized attitudes towards disability, as noted in Resolution A/80/170 (para. 15).
While the Advisory Opinion established States obligations regarding this right, specifically duties to respect, adopt legislative measures and progressive actions to its achievement (Title VIII, para. 5), there may be different interpretations for their implementation. The lack of clarity regarding the obligations arising from the right to receive care may, in turn, perpetuate gender roles and negatively impact women's rights.
4. Conclusions
The uncertainty surrounding the scope and lack of clear methodologies in implementation of the dimension of receive care may contribute to women’s burdens. The same applies to the rights of children and elderly persons, as women continue to be the main caregivers. Even though the IACtHR Advisory Opinion acknowledges that parents and family burdens should be shared equally (para. 177), caregivers’ roles are strongly tied to gender stereotypes. Therefore, without providing clear guidance on how services for those who require care can be restructured, implementing the right to care risks becoming a symbolic provision that maintains gender-based discrimination – or worse, reinforces existing inequalities.
Bio:
María Paz is a Chilean lawyer, and holder of a Master in Public Law and Constitutional Litigation from Universidad Diego Portales, and an LLM in Public International Law, Human Rights, from Utrecht University. She also has a Diploma in Administrative Law and Gender, Global and Public Policy. Her main interests revolves around human rights, women’s rights and gender equality.