I have been working with Fran Luck, one of the co-hosts of WBAI‘s feminist program, Joy of Resistance, on news stories for several months. Archives of the stories are available here, and below is the text of story I just recorded on gender sensitive aid and the Haiti earthquake.
Since last week’s devastating earthquake in Haiti, aid has begun to pour into the country from all over the world. Women’s rights NGOs are raising concerns about how immediate disaster relief and the subsequent period of recovery will address the unique needs of women.
As in any disaster, the women of Haiti are affected in different and deeper ways than men because of existing discrimination and poverty. Gender inequality raises a host of issues for disaster relief. For example, in addition to the central pillars of immediate aid, food, water, medical care and shelter, there are needs that are specific to women, including hygiene supplies and reproductive health care. The distribution of supplies requires careful thought if it is to be done justly and fairly. In everything from the units of aid distribution to the distribution sites themselves, special measures must be taken to ensure women’s full inclusion and even physical safety.
Sexual and physical assault become an increasingly pressing concern for women and girls in high-stress situations, and in a post-disaster context there is not often effective civil protection. According to Diana Duarte of MADRE, an international women’s rights NGO, women are “at increased risk of gender-based violence, especially domestic violence and rape” after a natural disaster.
As the response transitions from disaster management into rebuilding and recovery, it is increasingly important that women’s voices are heard and a gender perspective is including in planning and programs. As the Gender and Disaster Network points out, nothing in relief is “gender neutral.” Women are often left out of the decision-making process, and an active effort must be made to empower women to participate to ensure that the specific needs of women and girls are met.
Most of this story comes from the Feminist Peace Network (feministpeacenetwork.org) and the Gender and Disaster Network, whose website is gdnonline.org.
This is a cross-posting of a monthly column I write for Gender Across Borders called the Sexual and Reproductive Rights Situation Report which explores policy and political issues around the world. This month’s column focuses on proposed legislation to criminalize homosexuality in Uganda.
The extreme anti-gay legislation was introduced in Uganda by the ruling party in the Parliament, and goes beyond the current criminalization of homosexuality in the country to impose extreme penalties for so-called “homosexual behavior.” The original language of the bill included life imprisonment for anyone who even touches someone of the same sex with “homosexual intent,” punishment ranging from life in prison to death penalty for those who have homosexual sex, and imprisonment even for those who are aware of “homosexual activity” and fail to report it. A Washington Post editorial has called it “outrageous,” even without the death penalty. Hillary Clinton has joined human rightsgroups in condemning the law as incompatible with Uganda’s international human rights responsibilities. Interestingly, the text of the law includes a provision to ”prohibit ratification of any international treaties, protocols, agreements and declarations which are contrary or inconsistent” with the legislation. This language shows that the people who drafted the legislation are aware that certain provisions interfere with human rights (one proponent went so far as to say, “Homosexuals can forget about human rights”).
One Ugandan doctor working with an international HIV/AIDS organization is outraged that he may be mandated to report gay patients, and has highlighted the “potentially devastating effects on HIV prevention and services.” Human Rights Watch has also pointed out the danger the legislation presents to free expression rights by banning the “promotion of homosexuality.”
Global outcry: Protesters in London. Image care of the NY Daily News
According to a New York Times editorial, the existing situation for LGBT individuals in Uganda is not good: “gay Ugandans are tormented with beatings, blackmail, death threats and what has been described as ‘correctional rape.’” The Ugandan President, vocally anti-gay, has supported the bill while urging lawmakers to soften some of its provisions, but his separation from the actual outcomes is questionable given his party’s control over the Parliament. Part of what should make this issue particularly compelling for U.S. citizens is the role that U.S. Evangelical Christian political figures played in getting the legislation to where it is. If you’ve read Michelle Goldberg’s The Means of Reproduction, you’re familiar with the idea that the Christian Right in the U.S. has been quietly pushing an anti-sexual and reproductive rights agenda in African countries for some time. This bill is just the latest in a series of sneaky interventions by secretive organizations made up of American fundamentalism’s political elite. The Family is once such group, and it has been wielding power in the U.S. and around the world since the 1950s. Jeff Sharlet, who literally wrote the book called The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power, spoke to The Advocate about connections between U.S. fundamentalists and the Ugandan anti-gay legislation. There’s also this great interview with Rachel Maddow, where he explains the law’s connections to this shadowy fundamentalist underworld:
Some old friends of The Family include Reagan, the Bush family, and even congress members Stupak and Pitts (remember them?). The Family has been influential in ensuring that USAID funds go to abstinence-only programs and not to condoms– which we all know has been catastrophic in Africa. As this NY Times editorial points out while lambasting the meddling of U.S. fundamentalists, three specific U.S. figures were in Uganda in March preaching against the “gay agenda.” One of them is Scott Lively, who has credited “the gays” with the rise of Nazism and with engineering the Holocaust in his book, The Pink Swastika. He has denied intentionally sowing the seeds of this law with his screeds, but the organizers of the conference that brought him to Uganda helped draft the draconian language of the bill.While Lively and his merry men have no direct connection to The Family in the U.S., the trend is still troubling. We cannot allow fundamentalists to insinuate themselves into political decision-making. Jeff Sharlet has suggested that President Obama refuse to attend this year’s Prayer Breakfast, a high-level event that U.S. presidents have been attending since Eisenhower. According to Sharlet, it’s a strategic tool for The Family to build relationships and broker future political movement. You can bet that nothing those people have in mind is going to be good for LGBTQ folks– or for women for that matter. We must demand secular politics at home, and carefully watch fundamentalists’ involvement in other countries’ politics to protect both marginalized groups and the integrity of the political process.
An estimated 33 million people worldwide were infected with HIV/AIDS as of 2007, and in many areas infection rates are growing disproportionately among women and girls. Women represent 60% of new infections in Sub-Saharan Africa, and ”globally, HIV is the leading cause of death in women of reproductive age,” according to the AIDS Accountability InternationalScorecard on Women 2009. The UNAIDS Report on the Global AIDS Epidemic 2008 has stats on infection and mortality rates as well as a variety of related social factors. For instance, some countries including gender considerations in planning and funding HIV/AIDS program, but the vast majority still fall short. The Report identifies the oppression of women as a major factor contributing to women’s increased vulnerability, and recommends programs to “forge norms on gender equity.”
Vulnerability related to social power
Both the Scorecard and the UNAIDS Report identify gender inequality as a root of increased risk and vulnerability to HIV infection. As the Scorecard points out, “[gender] inequality may, for example, deny women the opportunity to negotiate safe sex, or force women and girls into abusive transactional sexual relationships in order to obtain food and other necessities.have access to the information, education and services needed to reduce their vulnerability to HIV infection. ” In other words, many women don’t have the power to decide when they have sex, or to demand that their partner use a condom.
the UNAIDS Report explicitly identifies the kinds of programs that could lead to the empowerment of women and lead to lowered infection rates among women and girls, recommending that “strategies to increase women’s economic independence and legal reforms to recognize women’s property and inheritance rights, should be prioritized by national governments and international donors.” The Report sites as evidence a study in Botswana and Swaziland that found that “women who lack sufficient food are 70% less likely to perceive personal control in sexual relationships, 50% more likely to engage in intergenerational sex, 80% more likely to engage in survival sex, and 70% more likely to have unprotected sex than women receiving adequate nutrition.” Survival sex. That’s some serious oppression!
A SWEAT Workshop
Sex workers, a further marginalized group in most societies, are at elevated risk of contracting STIs. Because of their stigmatized social status, they are also at elevated risk for receiving sub-par public health care. Check out this IRIN report on the effect the FIFA World Cup will have on sex workers in South Africa, and on the failure of the South African government to effectively address the issue of HIV/AIDS for sex workers, in spite of high rates of infection in the country. The upshot is that various advocacy groups are working specifically on the issue, including the Sex Workers Education and Advocacy Taskforce (SWEAT). This quote from a testimonial on SWEAT’s blog exemplifies the compounded risks of sex work, and why their organizing and advocacy is so important.
While working this job, I met a certain man in the hotel where I reside, as there is a bar on its ground floor. This man told me he wanted to take me home with him and so having agreed to his proposition, he then left money for me where I reside. So we went together where he lives, without him telling me he lived there with many other men. I was to find out the hard way as all six men then slept with me without putting on condoms. I cried helplessly as I had nowhere to go and report. I was afraid to go to the police for fear of being returned home as my papers are not in order. In addition, sometimes going to the police when you are a prostitute they do not listen to you and instead say ‘she who goes looking for scars will get them, you got what you were looking for.’
In one state in India, a rights-based advocacy group called SANGRAM works closely with local communities, and advocates for the inclusion of the needs of marginalized communities in sexual and reproductive health policy. Their empowerment bent is reflected in their mission: ”People should believe that they can change things. It is not about a few activists fighting for other people’s rights. Anybody who has imbibed this understanding should be able to go and fight for their rights.”
Here’s a powerful video highlighting SANGRAM’s work with sex workers.
At Risk: Rights Violations of HIV-Positive Women in Kenyan Health Facilities, a report published by the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) and the Federation of Women Lawyers-Kenya, provides an excellent case study of what gender-based discrimination can mean in the HIV/AIDS context. In addition to health systems failures affecting women living with HIV/AIDS, the report details abuses including violations of confidentiality, detention for failure to pay healthcare fees, and nonconsensual HIV testing. The report also does a great job of outlining how HIV/AIDS and reproductive rights dovetail for women. CRR also points out that such conditions represent violations of a variety of human rights, including the right to health and the right to freedom from discrimination.
The AIDS epidemic affects women and girls in other ways too. According to the UNAIDS Report, there will be a projected 14 million AIDS orphans by 2015, and AIDS orphans are far less likely to attend school then their counterparts. We already know that girl children are far less likely to be sent to school than boys, so the marginalization of female AIDS orphans is compounded. Zimbabwe, with the highest rate of HIV infection in the world, has had a rash of child rapesbecause of the myth, widespread in several African countries, that having sex with a virgin can “cleanse” you of AIDS. Obviously, the bodily and psychic integrity of the girls and women who are violated has little value for their attackers.
In a recent post here on Gender Across Borders, Jessica Mack tells the story of a woman whose husband intentionally infected her with HIV. She points out that the core of this incident “is a serious lack of respect for women as humans with rights.” That’s right, sister. Women’s sexual and reproductive rights are violated at the intra-personal and the systemic levels every day because of fundamental lack of respect for them (us!) as full human beings deserving of full rights and agency. Policies and programs to empower women and challenge gender norms are necessary in every community to empower women, and comprehensive sexuality education is required to give women, men, boys and girls the tools to make health sexual choices. HIV/AIDs, like maternal mortality, education and health are issues that will not be resolved without full respect for women’s rights and the full participation of healthy, empowered women.
Some actions you can take to help fight HIV/AIDS and empower women:
Sign With Women Worldwide: A Compact to End AIDS and keep up with the International Women’s Health Coalition (WHC)’s Action Alerts. IWHC’s HIV/AIDS work seeks to “empower women and girls to stand up for themselves and make healthy choices about their lives and those of their families.”
Donate to AIDS Accountability International, and NGO doing advocacy for HIV/AIDS programming through research and assessing compliance with international standards and compromises.
This is a cross-posting of a column I write on sexual and reproductive rights policy internationally for Gender Across Borders.
inappropriate dress in tehran
This month I’m focusing on sexual rights in Iran. First, let me give a quick overview of the concept sexual rights. According to a groundbreaking declaration by the International Planned Parenthood Federation, sexual rights are simply defined as “human rights related to sexuality.” They are listed in the publication linked above, and include the right to equality, equal protection of the law and freedom from all forms of discrimination based on sex, sexuality or gender. It’s important that they be defined and delineated so that they may be specifically protected, especially at a time period where fundamentalist policies are restricting the exercise of sexual and reproductive freedom here and around the world.
The ten rights specifically identified by IPPF are based upon treaty law and on the underlying principle of nondiscrimination, in this case based on sex, gender or sexuality; and the principle that “sexuality, and pleasure deriving from it, is a central aspect of being human, whether or not a person chooses to reproduce.” Violations of sexual rights in Iran range from arrests for “immoral” behavior or dress to sexual assault and rape by government agents, all in service of brutal repression and social control.
A woman being detained at a protest, on the Women’s Freedom Forum this picture is entitled “normal arrest”
While the detainment of women for inappropriate dress (including too-tight overcoats and pants short enough to show ankle skin) is itself a violation, it also goes beyond “moral policing” to the widespread and purposeful intimidation of women and the use of their sexuality as a weapon against them. Same goes for teenagers who were beaten for such “moral offenses” as an overly revealing veil or looking at girls. Their sexuality is being used as a club to beat the individuality and resistance out of them.
People of Iran face the death penalty for “crimes against morality” and “sexual crimes,” includinghomosexuality. Iranian President Ahmadinejad famously said that there are no homosexuals in Iran, a statement belied by the ongoing executions of people accused of “homosexual acts.” This great editorial on Salon points out what is at stake in naming and categorizing sexuality in Iran. It’s also interesting to note that the government subsidizes gender reassignment surgery. In Iran, you must chose one or the other role in a gender binary or face stoning or hanging. The documentary Be Like Others explores the phenomenon of sex reassignment in Iran.
There are even several young men on death row for alleged homosexual acts as children, in itself a grave violation of the prohibition against the death penalty for minors. Another young person, a girl of 16, was hanged for “acts incompatible with chastity” (having sex outside the confines of marriage). In her case, the religious judge actually placed the rope around her neck. He also received congratulatory letters from the town’s governor for his “firm approach.”
Women are frequently detained for dress-code offenses, and such charges are often used to detain protesters. Once within the power of the state, citizens are even more danger. Human Rights Watch has presented evidence that protesters arrested following the contested elections this year were rapedby guards. One prisoner who was raped was left bound and bleeding on the street. The medical examiner’s report in this case backed up the allegations of rape. While HRW makes a practice of presenting individual cases with excellent proof, there is evidence that the practice of prisoner rape and sexual assault is widespread. There are reports of prisoners being forced to rape other prisoners. In August a pro-reform presidential candidate said that he had heard from former officers and detainees who had since been released that detainees were “savagely raped by their jailers to the point of physical and mental damage.” Because the rapes seem to be focused on political prisoners, the violation of sexual rights in this case is clearly a tool of repression.
Shirin Ebadi
Those that defend human rights, including the famous Shirin Ebadi, are severely punished for their efforts to fight human rights violations. Ebadi has been jailed and tortured and had her NGO, the Centre for Defense of Human Rights, raided and shut down.
Let me be clear that my condemnation of the Iranian government and its ongoing direct violation of sexual rights, and human rights in general, is not a condemnation of Islam. The conflagration is false, and has too often been used to whip up jingoist fervor for right wing fundamentalist regimes here at home. I defer to Shirin Ebadi, who asserts that human rights are totally compatible with Islam can be guaranteed within a muslim legal framework. She herself was a judge before the fundamentalist takeover of Iran in 1979.
I hope that the human rights framework continues to be a tool to put the fundamentalists of the world (within whatever religious tradition they fall) on notice that the violation of rights is unacceptable. And I hope that the we can back such an assertion up by demanding, as a global community, respect for sexual and reproductive rights and for all human rights for all people.
Finally, I’ll leave you with a few sources from within Iran: the Women’s Freedom Forum- I attended a forum they co-hosted in support of a UN sanction on Iran, and they had a lot of interesting, on-the-ground information. WFF has a great photo gallery on their site, and just released a book reporting on executions and torture, called Working from Within. There’s also the Human Rights and Democracy International Project that has had great information on the post-election uprising and ongoing coverage of human rights defenders who are detained.
This month instead of focusing on a specific country, I’m going to broaden the scope to address a global epidemic– maternal mortality. Each year more than a half a million women die during pregnancy, giving birth, or in the critical few weeks following birth. That’s one woman every minute; most from preventable causes, and most (99%) occur in poor countries. In fact, the difference between maternal death rates in developing countries as compared to developed countries is absolutely staggering. Women in the developing world are 300 times more likely to die in childbirth than their counterparts in industrialized countries. According to a UNICEF report, “A woman in Niger has a one in seven chance of dying during the course of her lifetime from complications during pregnancy or delivery. That’s in stark contrast to the risk for mothers in America, where it’s one in 4,800 or in Ireland, where it’s just one in 48,000.” In addition to those women those women who perish, for each death 20 women suffer from illness or permanent injury like fistula.
The reduction of maternal mortality is part of the fifth Millennium Development Goal (MDG), but has only recently really begun to garner international attention. Anna Browne, wife of the British Prime Minister, just had a piece on maternal mortality on the Huffington Post- a ticket to issue stardom. More voices than ever before are trying to put and keep maternal mortality on the agenda.
Says one UNFPA communications specialist, more women die in childbirth than in wars. Ban Ki Moon recently called current rates of maternal mortality “inexcusable,” espcially in a world where we can “map the human genome and send vehicles to far reaches of space.” In addition, simple clinical interventions could drastically reduce the numbers of deaths, according to public health journal The Lancet.
A few countries where high rates of maternal mortality have recently made news:
A hospital in Ethiopia. Image care of The Huffington Post
Ethiopia:Twenty-two thousand women die every year in childbirth or of related causes. According to this Huffpo series, the major issue is health systems and access. The country of 77 million has about 200 gynecologists, and most women live far from clinics. The Ethiopian government’s response is an army of “health extension workers,” but even they can’t provide all the necessary services to the 15% of women who experience complications due to pregnancy or birth.
Bangladesh: The BBC calls Bangladesh “one of the most dangerous places in the world to have a baby.” As part of the “Survival” documentary series, the BBC has focused on maternal mortality there. The documentary shows home births attended by traditional midwives, and points out that they lack access to lifesaving medical care if complications arise. It also mentions that programs like microlending have led to the empowerment of women.
Sierra Leone: Amnesty International has just launched a campaign on maternal mortality in Sierra Leone, pointing out the fact that health is a human right.
Amnesty president Irene Khan has toured Sierra Leone and blogged the whole way, posting stats and pictures. One in 8 women die during childbirth in the country, many because they could not afford the fees associated with reproductive health care. In this report, Amnesty calls on the government to fix its corrupt and inadequate healthcare system, and to remove cost as a barrier to care. The government of Sierra Leone denies the validity of Amnesty’s report. You can write a letter to the president of Sierra Leone here.
A woman and her newborn in India. Image care of the Swedish International Development Agency.
India: This Human Rights Watch report points out that maternal death rates in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh are the highest in the country, but that its not an isolated problem– about one in five maternal deaths last year took place in India. All over India, women die from infection and shock after childbirth. One nonprofit has anti-shock garments that have fallen out of favor in more developed areas because they are a time-consuming, yet simple, alternative to ongoing basic care. The tight, girdle-like fabric must be worn on the trip home after giving birth to reduce the risk of hemorrhage, and then removed very slowly. A friend and colleague from India once explained to me that her work with maternal mortality centered around the concept of the “five cleans,” basics like soap for washing the midwife’s hands, a clean razor, and a plastic sheet to deliver the baby on to. Such simple interventions underscore the ease with which the international community could address maternal mortality, if the political will were there.
Swaziland: Rising maternal mortality has been attributed to “home delivery and lack of skilled attendants,” and poor health infrastructure. The country is focusing on maternal mortality as part of its National Programme on Sexual and Reproductive Health.
It seems that most of these stories point to common causes for staggering rates of maternal morality. Poor health systems come up over and over in accounts of African countries’ maternal mortality statistics. This often includes lack of trained staff, lack of phsycial infrastructure making acess difficult, and inadequate healthcare delivery systems. But given the health systems explanation for high levels of maternal mortality, what is the US’ excuse?
The United States: Black women in the US die from pregnancy or birth-related causes at almost double the rate of white women. Check out this wonderful series on African American maternal health at Women’s Enews.
And overall, the US has been ranked among the worst industrialized countries for maternal health by Save the Children. What’s going on here?
I think an overarching theme is the disempowerment of women by an international culture that seems to see women’s bodies as a commodity and females as expendible. Although maternal mortality has become a bigger blip on the world’s radar, a woman dying a minute of a preventable cause is nothing short of outrageous– as Amnesty says, a human rights emergency. The “position of women” emerges again and again as the root of maternal mortality. “Study after study shows that investing in women brings broad economic and social benefits,” says Ban Ki Moon. UNIFEM has said that although the medical and health systems causes are often emphasized, the solution truly lies in the empowerment of women.
Although health systems reform is critical, we must also keep working to force the heteropatriarchy to recognize women as agents in our own lives, as full citizens, and as equal human beings deserving of the full spectrum of human rights.
Brook Elliott-Buettner is a freelance human rights policy researcher and writer living in New York. More information and work is available at www.brookelliottbuettner.com.
This month the SRHR Sit Report focuses on the total prohibition of abortion in the Dominican Republic. The DR has one of the most restrictive policy regimes in the world and has led to maternal mortality and dire consequences for Dominican women’s health. Now, a constitutional amendment seeks to further restrict reproductive rights.
The Situation
For years, the women of the Dominican Republic have faced one of the toughest abortion policies in the world. According to a summary on the International Women’s Health Coalition blog, the 100-year old law prohibiting abortion even in the case of rape has been challenged by feminist and rights groups, while forces on the right pushed for a constitutional amendment to “protect life” from the moment of conception. Article 30, passed by a majority vote in April of this year, defines life as beginning before implantation. This is a crucial distinction because it means that the amendment will affect the legality of emergency contraception and IUDs. It also means that more Dominican women will die because they are not allowed access to critical reproductive health technologies and services.
A classic: Get your rosaries off our ovaries!
I hate to sound like a broken record, but the Catholic church hierarchy has again been one of the key culprits in restricting women’s rights. Article 30 comes in the wake of a “massive campaign” led by the Cardinal Archbishop of the Dominican Catholic church. The Human Development Office coordinator for the UNDP in the Dominican Republic has criticized the church’s involvement, saying, “The Catholic Church influences everything… it has become a source for social exclusion in the Dominican Republic. The dogma is placed ahead of the needs of the population, health, housing and better living conditions.” Catholic hierarchy, stop your meddling!
Implications for Dominican Women and Girls
The Dominican Gynecology and Obstetrics Society is warning that Article 30 will mean an increase in maternal death, which is already far too high in the country. Abortion can be an extremely safe procedure when performed in a safe and clinical atmosphere. In countries where abortion is restricted, however, clandestine abortion is often a leading cause of maternal mortality. In the Dominican Republic, there are 160 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. The Dominican Gynecology and Obstetrics Society’s president has said, “those deaths are the product of unsafe abortions. I would like the honourable legislators to tell me what we are going to do before the presence of a woman with severe preeclampsia or eclampsia, convulsing in any emergency room around the country, what must we do? See her die to protect ourselves from the repercussions stipulated by Article 30?”
In addition to the lives that will be lost unnecessarily because of this amendment, thousands of women will be denied their preferred method of contraception– the Intra-Uterine Device. IUDs and emergency contraception (the morning after pill) would both constitute violations under Article 30′s restrictive framework. There is a high contraceptive prevalence rate in the Dominican Republic, and a good chunk of that number is women with IUDs. Both the IUD and emergency contraception are critical pieces of the reproductive healthcare spectrum and their restriction further limits women’s ability to control their reproductive lives and participate as full and equal members of society. I’m not sure which I find more troubling: the blatant prohibition of abortion even given the scientific research that women will die because of it, or the more insidious restriction of women’s rights through closing down family planning options.
No to Article 30: The life of every woman matters
Fighting Back
Our Dominican sisters are fighting back… tomorrow afternoon, Dominican women will march on the Congress against Article 30. The march is being led by a coalition of feminist and human rights NGOs, including Colectiva Mujer y Salud (CESIM). CESIM’s director, Sonia Galvan, has said that abortion “is a human rights issue.” A woman after my own heart! I am especially pleased to see the Dominican women’s movement framing abortion as a human rights issue because it was a successful strategy in the decriminalization of abortion in Mexico City a few years ago. It’s also great to hear a UN representative speaking out against the heavy-handed involvement of the Catholic church heirarcy.
If you are a Dominican citizen (even living in the U.S.), you can send an email to your representative with a little help from the International Women’s Health Coalition blog. Pass it on to Dominican friends, too. At this point, according to IWHC, the role of other international activists and feminists is a bit more ambiguous. But keep your eyes on the developments in the Dominican Republic and continue raise your voice for the human rights of women everywhere.
An article I wrote on the human rights legal framework and abortion, using Mexico City as a case study, has just been published. Available online here. The abstract is available on my Publications page.
Since the passage of the law decriminalizing abortion in Mexico City was upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court, there have been a number of backlash bills in state congresses. More than a dozen states have already seen constitutional amendments to protect life “from the moment of conception.” Last week, Yucatan joined their repressive ranks. The official law, passed July 15, was published on August 7th and it severely restricts reproductive rights and health. The constitutional and penal code changes:
Criminalize use of IUD
Criminalize assisted reproduction
No medical services for women with ectopic pregnancy
No legal abortion for pregnancies that put women at risk or the result of rape
Mexican citizens can take action here by sending an email to the state’s governor and congress-persons. I think US citizens could probably erase the text of the email and write something in English about how people all over the world care about the lives and health of women in Yucatan.
As I reported earlier, some Mexican NGOs are calling the rash of such ammendments a pact by the Catholic heirarchy.
She read snippets from the book and discussed the ‘global culture war raging [over] who controls women’s fertility– and, more broadly, women themselves.” The book traces public policy affecting women’s human rights through recent history and across the globe. Here’s an interview with Goldberg on RH Reality Check.
The Activist Council’s Sex Ed Advocacy Group, which hosted the event, “advocat[es] for comprehensive sex education and cultivating sexual health awareness.” Their new campaign, “We’re going to the principal’s office!” is asking us to reach out to our contacts in the public school system to ask them to nudge their principals to bring comprehensive sex ed to their schools.
The Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights Situation Report is a monthly column I write for the feminist blog Gender Across Borders. This month’s SRHR Sit Report focuses on the Philippines, where the Catholic hierarchy holds tremendous power over legislators to the detriment of women’s reproductive health.
The situation:
The Philippines is an island state, and the most populated Southeast Asian nation. Abortion there is banned, and the Catholic hierarchy exerts tremendous power over the political process in spite of the Philippines’ constitutional separation of church and state. President Gloria Arroyo is supported by the church and openly backs its anti-contraception stance.
Millions of women in the Philippines have more children than they want because of a public policy regime that either fails to fund family planning services or bans them completely under pressure from the politically powerful Catholic church hierarchy. Contraception is not funded by the Department of Health, and has been effectively banned in the capital city of Manila since 2000.
In January, the Supreme Court refused to hear an attempt to overturn the ban– on a technicality. That case was filed by twenty poor, slum-dwelling women demanding their right to access to contraception. Poverty is a huge problem in the Philippines, as population grows and rice prices rise. The country produces 16 million tons of rice annually, but imports 2 million tons more to meet national need. And the population growth trajectory continues to trouble experts.
In the capital city where 70% of women live below the poverty line, poor and marginalized women are disproportionately affected by the contraception ban. Women with means still have access to contraception through private clinics and healthcare providers.
Until recently, condoms were distributed free in other parts of the Philippines with USAID funding, but even that was cut off last year. Many women are now unable to obtain any kind of contraception, and the consequences can be deadly. As in any country with restrictive reproductive health policies, clandestine abortion is a major public health problem. Maternal mortality is “a key challenge” in the Philippines, according to the UNFPA. It’s far too high; almost double that of neighbor Thailand. According to UN data, the vast majority of these deaths are are preventable. Maternal mortality, subject of the fifth Millennium Development Goal, clearly ties the need for comprehensive reproductive health care to the development agenda.
Often, unintended pregnancies drive families deeper into poverty– and according to a Guttmacher Institutereport, more than half of pregnancies in the Philippines are unintended. Curbing unwanted pregnancies could have tremendous impact on poverty and on the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. The public stance of the Catholic church, however, is that poverty is the result of corruption and economic policy. The stance blatantly flouts the international development community and the international laws that call for comprehensive reproductive health services to protect women’s reproductive health and human rights. This fact sheet illustrates the unequivocal link between forced maternity and poverty.
In spite of all this, the City of Manila has “engaged in a campaign against modern contraception.” The city, in line with church demands, encourages the use of ‘natural family planning;’ in other words, the rhythm method. We’ve all heard the old joke: What do you call people who use the rhythm method? Parents. I actually think it’s offensive to rhetorically equate ‘natural’ and ‘artificial’ family planning given the irrefutable scientific evidence for the level of effectiveness of contraceptive methods and the frequent failure of ‘natural family planning.’
Given overwhelming public support for contraception, many activists have high hopes for the 2010 elections. And there is currently a Reproductive Health Bill before the Philippine congress. Catholic officials have gone on the offensive, adopting strong language equating politicians who support reproductive health with abortionists and threatening excommunication. Even as maternal mortality rises, anti groups have labeled the legislation immoral and “pro-abortion.”
The government’s refusal to fund contraception and the outright ban on all forms of contraception in the city of Manila means that thousands of Philippine women’s constitutional and human rights are being violated on an ongoing basis. The church’s heavy-handed activism has held back the Philippines on important development indicators, and doubtless caused the deaths of many women. You can help fight for the reproductive autonomy of the women of the Philippines by joining the Center for Reproductive Rights’ facebook cause to End the Birth Control Ban in the Philippines, and donate to support CRR’s powerful and effective advocacy work there.
Brook Elliott-Buettner is a freelance human rights policy researcher and writer living in New York. More information and work is available at www.brookelliottbuettner.com.
About: I’m a social justice worker serving as Director of Social Services for a community health agency primarily serving the Latino community. I previously worked for an abortion rights policy advocacy organization in Mexico City. My primary research interest is health as a human right with a focus on sexual ... Continue reading »
A woman and her newborn in India. Image care of the Swedish International Development Agency.
A classic: Get your rosaries off our ovaries!
No to Article 30: The life of every woman matters
