Across the world, the majority of people identified as disabled have been neglected, hidden and ridiculed in the community (AHRC, 2013). Australian history demonstrates that in order to “cope” with this problem, many people with disabilities have been placed in institutions and/or prisons and have sterilized many young girls (AHRC, 2013). The recent concern presented by the Federal Disability Commissioner, Graeme Inns, regarding the increase in sterilization among young girls with disabilities raises the question of whether the rights of these young girls are being respected (ABC, 2012). This case study will examine legal and ethical issues while also discussing the rights of a person with a disability. By analyzing Australian family and common law, this case study will establish how the Australian government defines the rights of people with disabilities and how they are put into practice. The ethical issues that arise from this scenario will also be explored through appropriate literature in order to understand the implications of sterilizing young people with disabilities. Family law disputes are rarely resolved by Australia's highest court, and if they reach that level from a judicial perspective, they will most likely involve difficult and complex constitutional concerns (Forrester and Griffiths, 2009 ). Similar to the scenario, Marion's case came before the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia in June 1990, raising the difficult questions surrounding the confusing area of ​​parents and their children's rights (Harrison, 2009). The case brought to life the difficult question of who can legally authorize the sterilization of an intellectually disabled teenage girl, and thus sparked serious debate about the family automobile and treatment. These legislative and state-initiated measures ensure that in order to sterilize a disabled minor girl, the appeal must first be heard by the family court and then require the court's permission to proceed. This safeguard ensures that all ethical issues that may arise such as capacity to give consent, the individual's rights, what is in the individual's best interest and that all other temporary and reversible methods such as contraceptives oral are taken into account before sterilization is recognized. However, as the storyline suggests, Federal Disability Commissioner Graeme Inns emphasizes that there is still more to be done by the government to ensure the rights of disabled people are respected. This included changes to the law to ensure sterilization is only carried out in cases of medical emergency..