The sterilization of some young women with mental disabilities has always been the subject of legal debate and considered an ethical issue. Recently in Australia, the Federal Disability Commissioner was alarmed by the increasing number of disabled women and girls being sterilised. The Commissioner urges all states and territories on the scope of the practice, whereby some parents approach doctors regarding the possibility of a sterilization procedure for their disabled children without the authority of courts and tribunals (ABS News, 2012). This article discusses the role of the court, parents and other stakeholders and explores some ethical issues in sterilizing mentally handicapped female minors. Knowing that sterilization is irreparable, court orders emphasize that the parents or legal guardians who usually allow medical procedures are not even doctors but only the courts (Guardian and Administration Act, 1990). Furthermore, it is proposed that sterilization of women with mental disabilities shall not be permitted unless there are obvious reasons why such pregnancy would place the patient's life in imminent danger and the sterilization procedure shall be the last option for the best interest of the child (Goldman & Quint, 1991). According to Blackwood (1991) sterilization of disabled young women was an unusual practice based on the reason that it was in their best wellbeing, they would not have to worry about menstruation, pregnancy and the possibility of having disabled children during pregnancy. the future. Sterilizations among women with intellectual disabilities began in the United States of America from the 1920s to the 1970s according to eugenics theory (Silver, 2003). In this era the treatment and recognition of mental disorders...... middle of paper ......l statement on bioethics and human rights. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001461/146180e.pdfNewnham, H. (1996). Sterilization of minors with intellectual disabilities. Australian Disability Review, (1), 23. doi.10.1177/10778010122182541Petersen, K. (1992). The family versus Family Court: sterilization issues. Australian Journal of Public Health, 6, (2),196-201. Report on consent to sterilization of minors: Project no. 77 Part no. (1994). Western Australian Law Reform Commission.Silver, M. G. (2003). Eugenics and compulsory sterilization laws: Providing redress for victims of a shameful era in U.S. history. Geo. Washington. L. Rev., 72, 862.Wilkinson, J. E. & Cerreto, M. C. (2008). Primary care for women with intellectual disabilities. J Am Board Fam Med. 21:215-222.