Since 2008, April 2nd has been celebrated as World Autism Awareness Day<\/strong>, promoting the acceptance and inclusion of autistic individuals and recognizing their positive impact on society. In 2025, the focus is on the connection between neurodiversity and sustainability, highlighting how inclusive policies can contribute to global well-being and the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals. This day is commemorated by lighting iconic landmarks around the world in blue, such as the pyramids of Egypt, the \u00c1ngel de la Independencia in Mexico City, and the Eiffel Tower in Paris.<\/p>\n Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD)<\/strong> are developmental conditions affecting social interaction, communication, and interests, often manifesting in stereotyped and repetitive ways. They include autism, Asperger syndrome, and childhood disintegrative disorder. Diagnosis is typically made around the age of two, following signs such as regression in language and social skills, fears, phobias, sleep disturbances, and selfinjurious behaviors.<\/p>\n The global prevalence of ASD is approximately 1 case per 160 children<\/strong>, though it varies across studies. These disorders place a significant emotional and economic burden on families, exacerbated by a lack of adequate services. In 2012, the UN passed a resolution urging countries to ensure equal opportunities and access to support services for individuals with ASD and their families.<\/p>\n In Mexico, legislative and judicial developments have emerged to strengthen the rights of people with ASD. Below are the most relevant advancements.<\/p>\n The legal framework that guarantees the rights of autistic individuals is based on constitutional norms and international treaties signed by the Mexican State. Among the constitutional provisions, Articles 4, 5, and 123 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States stand out. At the international level, it includes:<\/p>\n \n Additionally, at the national level, there are laws that strengthen the rights of individuals with disabilities, such as the General Law for the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities and the General Law for the Care and Protection of People with Autism Spectrum Condition<\/strong>.<\/p>\n 1.- Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ). Unconstitutionality Action 33\/2015. National Human Rights Commission vs. General Law for the Care and Protection of Individuals with Autism Spectrum Condition (General ASD Law). February 18th, 2016. Justice Alberto P\u00e9rez Day\u00e1n.<\/p>\n The National Human Rights Commission challenged several aspects of the General ASD Law, arguing that certain provisions were discriminatory and violated fundamental rights. Key Points of the Ruling:<\/p>\n A. Certificates of Employment Qualification:<\/strong><\/p>\n The SCJN ruled that employment qualification certificates, required solely for individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) under the General ASD Law, were discriminatory and unconstitutional<\/strong>. These certificates imposed an exclusive requirement on this group, violating principles of equality and non-discrimination, as well as restricting fundamental rights such as freedom of profession and the right to dignified work. The SCJN noted that this requirement reinforced prejudices and stigmas, perpetuating the notion that individuals with ASD needed special accreditations to be deemed employable, which contradicted the law’s primary goal of promoting diversity and social inclusion.<\/p>\n Moreover, the SCJN emphasized that this provision not only hindered the labor integration of individuals with ASD but also had a stigmatizing effect<\/strong> by creating an artificial division between this group and the rest of the population. The Court underlined that any discriminatory measure restricting full access to the labor market and perpetuating biases is incompatible with human rights. This decision set a significant precedent in removing legal barriers and fostering the inclusion of individuals with disabilities on equal and respectful terms.<\/p>\n B. Decision-Making Model:<\/strong><\/p>\n The SCJN affirmed that the General ASD Law respected the right to legal personality and the capacity of individuals with ASD<\/strong> to make decisions with support, without allowing family members or guardians to override their will under the pretext of their “greater benefit.” It highlighted the obligation to ensure mechanisms to interpret and respect the decisions of individuals with ASD, aligning with the principles of autonomy and human dignity.<\/p>\n The ruling represented a significant step forward in protecting the human rights of individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) by invalidating discriminatory provisions and reinforcing the principles of equality, inclusion, and autonomy. Additionally, it emphasized the need to interpret and apply laws inclusively, eliminating barriers to guarantee full access to fundamental rights. This decision established a crucial precedent for building a more just and inclusive society in Mexico.<\/p>\n The SCJN reiterated these points and reasoning when resolving Unconstitutionality Action 89\/2015, filed by the National Human Rights Commission against the Law for the Care and Protection of Individuals with Autism Spectrum Condition in the State of Mexico (ASD Law EdoMex) on May 15th, 2017. Justice Arturo Zald\u00edvar Lelo de Larrea.<\/p>\n 2.- Supreme Court of Justice. Appeal for Review 159\/2013.<\/p>\n The SCJN established essential principles to fully respect the autonomy of individuals with disabilities and ensure the recognition of their legal personality and capacity to act. Historically, two models have been used to regulate the legal capacity of these individuals: the substitution model in decision-making <\/strong>and the assistance model in decision-making<\/strong>.<\/p>\n The former allows, upon confirming an individual’s functional diversity, their will to be replaced by another person’s decision acting in their “best interest.” However, this approach strips individuals of their autonomy and fosters total dependency.<\/p>\n In contrast, the assistance model in decision-making<\/strong> represents a significant shift, aligning with the paradigm established in Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Under this model, although individuals with disabilities may receive help in making decisions, they always retain ultimate control over those decisions. This approach respects and protects freedom of choice, encouraging active participation and the assumption of responsibilities in accordance with individual capacities in each case. The Court emphasized that any judicial determination limiting legal capacity must prioritize the person’s free self-determination, avoiding situations where family members or guardians make decisions on their behalf under the argument of “greater interest,” as this would hinder the full development of their identity and autonomous life.<\/p>\n In conclusion, the Court underscored that the assistance model not only ensures equal conditions in legal recognition but also guarantees respect for the preferences and rights of individuals with disabilities. This model strengthens their personal development, fosters their autonomy, and promotes their social inclusion on equal terms with others. Thus, it aims for judicial and legislative decisions to align with the principles of dignity, freedom, and respect for individuals with disabilities.<\/p>\n 3.- Supreme Court of Justice. Direct Amparo Review 2805\/2014.<\/p>\n The Court held that the assisted decision-making model <\/strong>respects the autonomy of individuals with disabilities, allowing them to make legal decisions, with support if necessary.<\/p>\n This model always prioritizes the will and preferences of the individual and establishes safeguards to ensure that these decisions are neither overridden nor undervalued. In doing so, it promotes respect for human rights, ensuring active participation and the capacity to make decisions on equal terms.<\/p>\n When it is not possible to determine an individual’s will, even after significant efforts, the principle of the best possible interpretation of their will and preferences<\/strong> shall apply. This entails establishing mechanisms that honor any manifestation of their will, avoiding substitution under the argument of a supposed “greater benefit.” This approach fosters self-determination and dignity for individuals with disabilities.<\/p>\n 4.- Fourth Collegiate Administrative Court of the First Circuit. Amparo Review 108\/2019.<\/p>\n A private school in Mexico City arbitrarily imposed a reduced schedule and different conditions on an 11-year-old girl with autism, leading her mother to file an amparo lawsuit alleging discriminatory treatment. The court determined that the institution acted as the responsible authority in this case and granted amparo protection to the minor, ordering her immediate reintegration into the common schedule.<\/p>\n The ruling stated that the measures imposed by the school director infringed upon the girl’s right to inclusive education, which is protected under Article 3 of the Constitution and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The court emphasized that students with special educational needs must be included in the general education system, promoting integration and avoiding exclusion. It also highlighted that any reasonable adjustments must be based on medical or psychopedagogical reasons while always respecting the best interests of the child.<\/p>\n This ruling reaffirms the right of individuals with disabilities to receive inclusive education without discrimination and on equal terms. It underscores the obligation of both public and private educational institutions, as well as the State, to uphold this principle.<\/p>\n 5.- Supreme Court of Justice. Amparo Review 159\/2013.<\/p>\n This case was resolved in favor of the individual with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Ricardo Adair. The Court issued a decision in easy-to-read format, as transcribed below:<\/p>\n \n Although legislative and judicial progress has been made in protecting the rights of individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), much work remains to be done. The most essential step is for society to foster significant changes in attitudes that promote understanding and inclusion, as well as adjust urban planning, labour policies and public health policies to address the needs of this population group. These changes can be accelerated if there is heightened awareness of the challenges faced by individuals with ASD.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I. Introduction Since 2008, April 2nd has been celebrated as World Autism Awareness Day, promoting the acceptance and inclusion of autistic individuals and recognizing their positive impact on society. In 2025, the focus is on the connection between neurodiversity and sustainability, highlighting how inclusive policies can contribute to global well-being and the achievement of Sustainable […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":2654,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2652","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-otros"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2652","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2652"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2652\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2657,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2652\/revisions\/2657"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2654"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2652"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2652"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2652"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}II. General Considerations<\/h4>\n
III. Constitutional Framework of the Rights of Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder<\/h4>\n
\n
IV. Relevant Judicial Precedents Regarding the Rights of Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)<\/h4>\n
\n
V. Conclusion<\/h4>\n