About Me

My photo
I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Britain Defies US with Funding to Boost Safe Abortion Services

February 6, 2006 by Sarah Boseley for the Guardian

The British government will today publicly defy the United States by giving money for safe abortion services in developing countries to organisations that have been cut off from American funding. Nearly 70,000 women and girls died last year because they went to back-street abortionists. Hundreds of thousands of others suffered serious injuries.

Critics of America's aid policy say some might have lived if the US had not withdrawn funding from clinics that provide safe services - or that simply tell women where to find them. The "global gag" rule, as it has become known, was imposed by President George Bush in 2001. It requires any organisation applying for US funds to sign an undertaking not to counsel women on abortion - other than advising against it - or provide abortion services.

The UK will today become the founder donor of a fund set up specifically to attempt to replace the lost dollars and increase safe abortion services. The Department for International Development will contribute £3m over two years. DFID and the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) - whose clinics across the world have suffered badly - hope that others, particularly the Scandinavians, Dutch and Canadians, will be emboldened to put money in too.

"I think the UK is being very brave and very progressive in making this commitment," said Steven Sinding, director general of the IPPF. "We're deeply grateful for this gesture not only financially but also politically. Tens of thousands of women who depend on our services are not able to get them. We're committed to the expansion of safe abortion because in any society no matter how efficiently contraception is made available there will be unplanned and unwanted pregnancies."

The "global gag", he said, had increased the number of unsafe abortions by stopping funding to clinics that primarily provide contraception. "What I've never been able to figure out about American policy is why they persist in cutting down funding to organisations that are about preventing unwanted pregnancies." International development minister Gareth Thomas said the government hoped the US position would change: "We work very closely with the Americans but we have a very different view from them on abortion. Friends can disagree. I recognise that the Americans are not going to want to contribute at the moment. We obviously continue to hope that the position will change. It is a position that has been decided by Congress so we're very aware of it and they know that."

DFID asked IPPF to produce a report on the scale of the damage caused by unsafe abortion. Death and Denial: Unsafe Abortion and Poverty, is published today. It reveals that an estimated 19 million women will risk the consequences of an unsafe abortion this year, of whom 70,000 will die. This accounts for 13% of the 500,000 maternal deaths each year. Reducing unsafe abortions is critical to reaching the UN's Millennium Development Goal on cutting maternal mortality, said Mr Thomas.

Women's low status in many poor countries makes them vulnerable to sexual coercion, abuse and exploitation, says the report. Almost 50% of sexual assaults worldwide are against girls aged 15 or less. The death and injury toll is highest in countries where abortion is illegal or severely restricted, as in Kenya, where some 30% to 50% of maternal deaths are a result of unsafe abortion. The Family Planning Association of Kenya, an IPPF member, chose to forfeit US funds rather than sign the "global gag" clause. It was forced to close three reproductive health clinics, scale back others and slash outreach programmes. Many other organisations are affected by the global gag, including Marie Stopes, which is bigger in some countries than IPPF. The money from the new fund will be equitably shared among all those who have lost US funds. IPPF, which has itself lost $15m (£9m) a year for the past five years, together with the provision of contraceptives worth $2m to $4m, hopes the fund may eventually raise up to $35m.

14 comments:

Juggling Mother said...

My first thought was "YES!" well done UK!

I didn't know about the global gag thing. That's awful. How can the current US government declare that it will not fund ANY organaisation that offers what is a perfectly legal service in the US? I'm absolutely horrified.

It's bad enough that they think they can police the world & tell any country that doesn't have the values & opinions as them that they are "wrong", but to force countries do take on a religious/moral stance different to their own is just unbelievable.

CyberKitten said...

Mrs A said: to force countries do take on a religious/moral stance different to their own is just unbelievable.

Welcome to Bush World. That particular 'gag order' has been in place for quite some time apparently.

Sorry to have horrified you.

[Note to self. Post a pink & fluffy story soon]

Juggling Mother said...

CK, you don't do pink and fluffy on this blog:-)

I'm horrified that it happened, but more that it didn't recieve any media attention. I knew the S had cut loads of funding, but didn't know that they were specifying who could recieve it in that way. Why haven't we heard of it before now?

(I'm not saying nothing was mentioned at the time, cos it might have been, but it certainly didn't garner a lot of attention, or any ongoing in depth reports!)

Michael K. Althouse said...

There's a well deserved slap in the face. Proud to be an American**

**Policy dependant!

~Mike

Sadie Lou said...

"I think the UK is being very brave and very progressive in making this commitment," said Steven Sinding, director general of the IPPF. "We're deeply grateful for this gesture not only financially but also politically. Tens of thousands of women who depend on our services are not able to get them. We're committed to the expansion of safe abortion because in any society no matter how efficiently contraception is made available there will be unplanned and unwanted pregnancies."

Let me say that again: Because no matter how efficiently contraception is made available there will be unplanned and unwanted pregnancies.

You know what, I applaud this guy for not sugar coating the truth. Pro Choicers need to stop using excuses like (rape & medical reasons) to support abortion. This guy calls it like it is:
Unwanted
Unplanned
Hell, if you're gonna fight on the side of the mother--at least play the right statistic card and quit justifying your stance with the lesser known reason why women get abortions.
It is what it is and it is sad.

craziequeen said...

oy!

Pink and Fluffy is MY job.....

cyberkitten is more - er - um - uh - deep and meaningful....

cq

CyberKitten said...

Sadie Lou said: It is what it is and it is sad.

It certainly can be (and probably usually is) a very sad thing to do. Sometimes it's also a necessary thing to do too... and certainly as far as I know there's usually a pretty good reason for a termination.

Michael K. Althouse said...

You and sadie lou need to stop.

~Mike

JR said...

Article said: "Women's low status in many poor countries makes them vulnerable to sexual coercion, abuse and exploitation."
Sadie Lou said: "You know what, I applaud this guy for not sugar coating the truth. Pro Choicers need to stop using excuses like (rape & medical reasons) to support abortion. This guy calls it like it is: Unwanted Unplanned
Hell, if you're gonna fight on the side of the mother--at least play the right statistic card and quit justifying your stance with the lesser known reason why women get abortions. It is what it is and it is sad."
It is beyond sad, it's criminal and inhumane. In 3rd world nations, it is what it is. Who would think to call it rape if the young girl didn't put up a fight? She was young and more naive than the young girls we're used to seeing. She was probably not educated because with education comes power and self-determination. She's female and likely has no power to _say_ no much less put up a physical fight. Coercion and exploitation of the young and ignorant do cause unplanned and unwanted pregnancies. Should we punish these young girls further by making them bear children when they're still children themselves? Should we make them deal with the trauma of trying to feed and raise that child in a country where most are already starving? Should we make her old before her time and let her watch her child die from hunger, disease, or violence? Proper education and contraception would go a long way in preventing unwanted pregnancies and unwanted abortions. I protested like hell about this years ago when Congress was taking this funding away. But let's not worry about them, they're female, black and poor. They have nothing we want. That's the way our government works isn't it?

Juggling Mother said...

Of course, if contraception was widely available, and people were properly educated in it's use, there wouldn't be anywhere near as many abortions needed. Or as many deaths.

It comes down to education again. And who is putting the kybosh on educating about sex & contraception? Oh, that would be the church!

Sadie Lou said...

V.V.--
again, you are taking the worst possible scenario and building a case for abortion with it when we all know that here in the states, unwanted and unplanned, rule.
The siuation you describe is unfair, unjust and a horrible tragedy--reason enough to kill a baby? I don't know. It's worth thinking about.

OldLady Of The Hills said...

Oy Oy Oy!
I applaud the UK for doing what they are doing. And I'm ASHAMED, I Say..ASHAMED of my country's stance!!! Oh Please Help Us And Save Us from The Bushies and they're Ilk!!!!

Pink and Fluffy..here I come.

On another subject..(well, sort of...)Did any of you in the UK get to see the Coretta Scott King funeral??? THAT was great!!!! Jimmy Carter and Lowry were GREAT, GREAT, GREAT! Bush--Zero! Well I guess maybe he gets a one for showing up! HA!

JR said...

Hi Sadie. I was referring to the abortion situation in 3rd world nations. I believe the coercion, poverty and ignorance factors compound the need for contraception and abortion. I realize in this country, it's a different story. But I'm also sure there are still way too many young girls coerced into something they're not prepared for and no one is providing them with the skills to say no, the education to understand how it happens, or the contraception to protect themselves, thus they end up at abortion clinics. I'd much rather nip this in the bud than have to clean up the mess when it reaches the abortion stage. But cutting these funds here and abroad, just increases the number of pregnancies that someone will have to deal with. When there's no money or options, girls will risk their lives rather than have a baby. I think those girls lives are worth saving and think early intervention is the way so they never have to face the stark reality of abortion. I think those babies lives are worth saving too, there should be counseling and options. But in the end, if the girl does not want the pregnancy, and does not want to carry it to term, that should be her decision. Something I don't hear about connected to all these abortions are the guys out there fathering children. They need to be held accountable somehow. They also need education, contraception and intervention from the community. A lot of guys see themselves as "studs" and find prestige in the number of kids they father and abandon. We need to undo that warped thinking.

Sadie Lou said...

Something I don't hear about connected to all these abortions are the guys out there fathering children. They need to be held accountable somehow. They also need education, contraception and intervention from the community. A lot of guys see themselves as "studs" and find prestige in the number of kids they father and abandon. We need to undo that warped thinking.

Totally agree.
:)