Thomson Reuters Foundation

Inform - Connect - Empower

U.N. Agencies Duck Taking Stand on Safe Abortion

Womens eNews - Tue, 2 Aug 2011 00:07 GMT
Author: Womens eNews
Tweet Recommend Google + LinkedIn Email Print
Leave us a comment

Any views expressed in this article are those of the author and not of Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Potential Contentious Debate UN Women's strategic plan had to go through its executive board, which is made up of 41 member states, some of which impose severe restrictions on abortion. "Unfortunately, the discussion of these topics would have erupted into a contentious debate amongst member states, stalling the approval of the plan," says Margot Baruch, program coordinator at the Center for Women's Global Leadership, an academic research institute based at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J. It boils down to a systemic political failure, says Luisa Cabal, director of the International Legal Program at the Center for Reproductive Rights, the New York-based legal advocacy group. "The donor governments and major players need to demand leadership." A recent report by the Guttmacher Institute, the New York-based research group for reproductive health, identifies crucial gaps in global efforts to tackle unsafe abortion. "Despite the international community's growing attention to and resources for maternal health, many leading advocates, policymakers and donors--including the United States--are reluctant to even acknowledge the role of unsafe abortion in maternal mortality, much less address it directly," says the report. The United States is the largest single international donor and many say its silence on the dangers of unsafe abortions has been a key obstacle to putting abortion on the global agenda. "U.S. leadership is a big problem," says Barbara Crane, executive vice president of the global reproductive health advocacy group Ipas, which has U.S. headquarters in Chapel Hill, N.C. Agencies of the U.N. "want to avoid controversy and they want to avoid offending the U.S. congress because the U.S. is such a major donor." Global Gag Rule In 2001, the Bush administration re-instated the Mexico City Policy or global gag rule, which prohibited U.S. aid from funding any group involved in abortion-related work. (It was called the gag rule because that prohibition extended to even talking about or counseling abortion or advocating for change in abortion laws.) The administration subsequently de-funded the U.N. Family Planning Association over allegations that the international development agency supported coercive abortion policies in China. President Barack Obama reversed these decisions in 2009, but has been reluctant to push things further. "He did rescind the global gag rule but they were very loath to do anything more proactive and there's a lot more they should have been doing early in the administration when they had a lot of political capital," says Crane. The Obama's administration's recent report "Women in America," commissioned by the White House Council on Women and Girls, was hailed as the first to compile comprehensive data on the status of women in the United Sates since 1963. But it stayed silent on the hot-button topic of abortion. Obama is bound by the 1973 U.S. law known as the Helms amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act. It prohibits U.S. aid from being used to promote "abortion as a method of family planning." He also faces a strong tide of conservative opposition, with state lawmakers this year introducing a torrent of anti-abortion laws. Some of the laws are designed to pick fights that go to the Supreme Court, where pro-choice activists assume the bench, on balance, is unfriendly. Limitations in Europe Even in Europe, only a handful of governments--the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland--have unequivocally endorsed abortion rights. Support from other key governments, including Australia, Canada and Germany, is missing. UN Women told Women's eNews that abortion laws can only be determined at the national level and subsequently fall outside of its mandate. But the agency is trailing far behind human rights jurisprudence and treaties, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, or CEDAW, the main frame for women's international rights. The CEDAW Committee has condemned restrictive abortion laws, along with other treaty monitoring bodies, including the Human Rights Committee (for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and the Committee against Torture. Last year, the European Court of Human Rights, based in Strasbourg, France, ruled that Ireland had violated the rights of a woman with cancer by denying her access to an abortion. A trained physician, Bachelet, under-secretary-general and executive director of UN Women, can be assumed to know the risks associated with unsafe abortion. As president of Chile - where abortion is illegal - she upset conservative religious forces by expanding the availability of the morning-after pill among young women. But she did not push to legalize abortion. For Ipas' Crane, the sidestepping of abortion rights by the U.N.'s primary advocacy group for women is a major disappointment. "We need a mobilizing goal or target to inspire the international community to take stronger action on this issue," she says.

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of the Thomson Reuters Foundation. For more information see our Acceptable Use Policy.

comments powered by Disqus