Moreover, women with disabilities often experience discriminatory treatment, particularly from HSPs. This ranges from insensitive remarks to blatant nullity of their SRHR. Below were direct quotations from the conduct of FGDs, and public hearings from NCR and CAR, to illustrate: ● “Ba’t pa kasi kayo nanganganak eh bulag naman kayo.” (“Why are you still getting pregnant, when you are blind?”) ● “Bakit kasi ganyang edad eh nag-asawa ka pa?” (“Why get married at your age?”) ● "Magpa-ligate ka na kasi hindi mo naman kayang mag-anak, tama na yang isa lang. Eh kasi pag nagkaanak ka ulit, iiwan ka ulit ng asawa mo!" (“You should get ligated because you are not capable of taking care of a child. One child is enough. If you bear another child, your husband will leave you again!”) Women with disabilities’ narration of their stories show deep-seated prejudice with regard to their SRHR. FGDs and public hearings surfaced that many women with disabilities received medical advice to undergo ligation or avoid pregnancy, due to the possibility that their child will inherit their disability. Some experienced being judged by health service providers as incapable of taking care of children. Others recounted how their own families prevented them from having relationships and families, for fear that they will become single mothers, as their partner will eventually leave them due to the mere fact that they have a disability. As related by a visually impaired participant from Butuan City in a public hearing in CARAGA, she was discouraged by her doctor to get pregnant. She expressed, “Upon consultation with my doctor, I was diagnosed with an infection in the uterus. I asked her if I would still be able to bear a child. She then told me, “Yes you can, but for me, considering your disability, I wouldn’t want to.” Likhaan revealed that HSPs commonly take for granted women with disabilities themselves in the discussion of their health and treatment, in favor of their companions. This prejudice was articulated by another participant with mobility impairment from Cagayan de Oro, when she complained of the exclusion of women with disabilities from essential trainings, and in the provision of RH commodities. According to her, “Kung kinsa ra gyud tong duol sa kasing-kasing ang mahatagan ug seminar, mahatagan ug condom, pills, etc. Unya tungod pud kay naa mi disability, abi nilag kay ing-ani mi dili mi kailangan makahibalo ana.” (Whoever is close to the officials will have access to seminars, condoms, pills, etc. and because we have a disability, they think we don’t need to know about all that.) Cases of coercion and/or non-consent were also among forms of discrimination documented in the Inquiry. Accounts of women with disabilities deprived of or denied reproductive and bodily autonomy were shared during the inquiry. In Manila (NCR), a woman with cerebral palsy was forced to undergo tubal ligation after giving birth in Quirino Memorial Hospital; a deaf woman confined in Fabella Hospital was injected with 14