Posts Tagged ‘reproductive health’

Reproductive health in conflict settings

Thursday, July 28th, 2011 by Christopher Lindahl

During conflicts and displacement, the need for reproductive health services does not disappear. A new paper in BMC Health and Conflict reports on baseline findings from surveys of women in conflict settings in Uganda, Sudan, and the DRC.

The authors conclude:

Family planning services are a critical means of meeting women’s and men’s health needs and human rights in all countries of the world, including those affected by conflict. Data show a demand for spacing and limiting births among women in these sites, just as elsewhere in Africa; however, in these sites, the demand has far outstripped the available services. To fill this gap, family planning programs must be strengthened in sub-Saharan Africa, and refugees and displaced people must be included in national and donors’ health and development plans. Moreover, all parties must maintain a longterm perspective, particularly in conflict-affected states, since history shows that progress in meeting communities’ reproductive health needs has been slow even in countries at peace.

  • Share/Bookmark

Linkages Among Reproductive Health, Maternal Health and Perinatal Outcomes

Friday, November 19th, 2010 by Christopher Lindahl

MHTF Director Ann Blanc published an article in the December 2010 issue of Seminars in Perinatology.

She and her colleagues reviewed about 1,000 studies dealing with reproductive health, maternal health, and perinatal and neonatal outcomes and found:

Our review amply demonstrates that opportunities for assessing outcomes for both mothers and newborns have been poorly realized and documented…This review demonstrates that RHMNH are inextricably linked, and that, therefore, health policies and programs should link them together. Such potential integration of strategies would not only help improve outcomes for millions of mothers and newborns but would also save scant resources. This would also allow for greater efficiency in training, monitoring, and supervision of health care workers and would also help families and communities to access and use services easily.

  • Share/Bookmark

Family Planning and saving lives– or why the practical should really not be political.

Friday, September 17th, 2010 by Raji Mohanam

The MHTF is soliciting reactions from the maternal health community to the newly released UN MMR data. Below is the first of these posts. Our hope is that, together, these comments will serve as a springboard for discussion and provide momentum towards MDG5.

 

Written by: Maria M. Pawlowska, Cambridge Gates Scholar

 

The newly revealed UN estimates seem to fall in the category of ‘feel-good news’ – maternal deaths are in fact decreasing, as argued by Hogan and colleagues earlier this year. However, only ten countries are actually on track to meet MDG5 and three times as many have made “insufficient or no progress”. But instead of pouring over these rather depressing figures I would like to concentrate on one of the issues brought up by Thoraya Ahmed Obaid the Executive Director of UNFPA, which to me sums up how we need to move forward. – “Every birth should be safe and every pregnancy wanted.”

 

A lot of great things have already been written about the need for trained birth attendants, but there is painfully little attention paid to the life-saving and life-transforming potential of family planning, so I will concentrate on the latter issue. As many as a third of maternal deaths could be prevented if women in developing countries were given access to what we in the ‘developed North’ consider a basic, essential and obvious service – evidence-based family planning. The demographic statistics speak for themselves – either people in Europe and America basically stop having sex after their first child, or they use effective, safe contraceptive methods for decades. There are other, awful statistics about what happens when women are denied the basic right to control their fertility – unsafe abortions are still one of the four major causes of maternal deaths. This alone should force us to reconsider maternal and reproductive health provisioning in the developing world and is the starkest evidence of how badly family planning is wanted and needed. But by no means are the deaths caused by unsafe abortions the only ones that could be prevented by access to family planning. Allowing women to space their births would significantly decrease the rates of all maternal an newborn deaths because it would give women’s bodies time to recover and prepare for another pregnancy.

 

Being in control of one’s own body is a basic human right and should not only be the privilege of the rich. Women who are not always in the position to deny sex as a method of contraception, should nonetheless have the ability to limit their family size if they so wish. Moreover, women who do not wish to deny themselves and their partners the joy of consensual sex should be supported in their decision to prevent unwanted pregnancies using safe methods no matter where they live. Providing effective family planning saves lives and hugely increases the quality of life – something we’ve learned a lot about in the developed world since the introduction of the contraceptive pill fifty years ago. It’s really time we stop considering contraception a ‘delicate’ or ‘political’ matter when discussed in the context of the developing world and start seeing it as the reliable, safe, and needed service it is, and we’ve long known it to be.

  • Share/Bookmark

Maternal Health Realities: Accountability and Behavior Change

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010 by Raji Mohanam

Written by Calyn Ostrowski, Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars

Four days ago a young woman died giving birth in a bustling marketplace in New Delhi. Just steps away from Parliament, this woman was left to die and no emergency care was sent to her–no midwives, nurses, or doctors; just people walking around her accepting the situation as normal and an uncontrollable way of life. But this is Delhi…not a remote tribal village where the nearest health clinic is hours away (on foot).

This juxtaposition lingers on in me as I sit in the plenary session of day two at the Global Maternal Health Conference and listen to Syeda Hameed, member of the Indian Parliament Planning Commission, discuss her recent visit to a remote village where every house has 10 children living in filth, flies, and emptiness.

Although I have been working on such development issues for the last five years I do not work in the field, nor do I visit the developing world on a regular basis. Hearing these stories, coupled with my firsthand experience of witnessing poverty here in Delhi reminds me of the daily reality of those 342,900 women who die every year. This is their way of life and I think it’s poignant that today’s sessions emphasize community based care, family planning, accountability, behavior change, and culture.

“Context, context, context,” said Wendy Graham of IMMPACT at yesterday’s plenary session. I agree, the context of social and cultural norms is an underlying factor that must be taken into consideration when implementing maternal and child health (MNCH) programs. With a background in psychology, I appreciated when Dr. Zulfiqar Bhutta, of Aga Khan University, recognized the toll of poverty on the imagination and the mentality of fatalism.

That is why it is so essential to “ask the people how they feel and bring their voices into the forums where policy decisions are made,” said Hameed. It is also important to hold key players accountable and include men in MNCH activities.

During the side session Male Involvement in Reproductive and Maternal and Newborn Health six field experts (in which half the panelists and audience members were men!) discussed effective methods for increasing male participation in family planning, vasectomies, gender equality, and hospital care.

The key findings from this discussion include:

•    Targeted interventions that educate men about danger signs and pregnancy complications correlates with behavior change and increased facility births.
•    Many young married men feel pressured to prove their fertility. A sample of men was evaluated and those who had increased education and income were more likely to delay first pregnancy.
•    Vasectomy is not something men want to talk about with family planning fieldworkers; however, official recognition of the vasectomy benefits by the government did increase referrals.
•    Puppet and theater shows that demonstrate gender equity behaviors provide an opportunity for dialogue. Women in this study reported increased gender equity in family planning decision-making.

There are so many variables that exacerbate the maternal mortality cycle, but evidence presented here provides REAL solutions.  It is time to scale up these solutions and political willpower will be essential.

Calyn Ostrowski is the Coordinator of the Maternal Health Dialogue Series in partnership with the Maternal Health Task Force and UNFPA at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Stay up to date with the conference happenings! Follow the Maternal Health Task Force and EngenderHealth on Twitter: @MHTF and @EngenderHealth. The conference hashtag is #GMHC2010.

For more posts about the Global Maternal Health Conference, click here.

For the live stream schedule, click here.

Check back soon for the archived videos of today’s presentations.

  • Share/Bookmark

Global Maternal Health Conference 2010: Empowering the Next Generation

Monday, August 30th, 2010 by Christopher Lindahl

Written by Calyn Ostrowski, Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars

“We do not need new legislation… we need affordable, effective, and scalable solutions,” said Shn Gulamnabi Azad, Minister of Health, India, at the opening ceremony of the first-ever Global Maternal Health Conference in New Delhi.

Co-hosted by the Maternal Health Task Force and the Public Health Institute of India, this three-day technical meeting builds upon the momentum of Women Deliver and the G8 summit by bringing together 700 researchers, program managers, advocates, media, and young people to exchange ideas, share data, develop strategies, and identify solutions for reducing maternal mortality.

In order to reduce India’s maternal mortality rates, Azad called for the repositioning of family planning programs to include maternal and child health and not limit the scope of services to population control as historically executed. Improving family planning and maternal health services must also address the reproductive health needs of adolescent girls and India is currently developing a new ministry that will target gender inequality, poverty, early child marriages, as well as other critical health issues important to young girls such as the dissemination of sanitary napkins.

“Although the legal age of marriage is 18, there are districts in India where 35 percent of the population is married between the ages of 15-18,” said Azad. During the side event Adolescent Girls: Change Agents for Healthy Mother and Child technical experts such as Anil Paranjap of the Indian Institute of Health Management presented scientific evidence that girls who marry between 15-18 are five times more likely to die during childbirth than women in their early 20’s.

“We still have deep-rooted subordination that makes it very difficult for young women to realize their sexual and reproductive health rights,” said Sanam Anwar with the Oman Medical College. Interventions such as the UDAAN project–a private-public partnership between CEDPA and the Government of India–demonstrate promising solutions for empowering young people through the use of existing infrastructure. In collaboration with teachers, parents, principals, and students this project successfully increased leadership skills and improved youth knowledge on menstruation, health, friendship, peer pressure, early marriage, and reproductive health, said Sudipta Mukhopadhyay of CEDPA.

Empowering “young people” to improve maternal health also requires that the community support committed new thinkers and future leaders. The Young Champions of Maternal Health Program is a unique and refreshing group of young professionals from 13 countries dedicated to improving maternal health, and I look forward to learning how this new energy will further the maternal health agenda.

Calyn Ostrowski is the Coordinator of the Maternal Health Dialogue Series in partnership with the Maternal Health Task Force and UNFPA at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Stay up to date with the conference happenings! Follow the Maternal Health Task Force and EngenderHealth on Twitter: @MHTF and @EngenderHealth. The conference hashtag is #GMHC2010.

For more posts about the Global Maternal Health Conference, click here.

For the live stream schedule, click here.

Check back soon for the archived videos of today’s presentations.

  • Share/Bookmark

Call for Participation: International Conference on Reproductive Health Management to be Held in Sudan

Monday, August 2nd, 2010 by KateMitch

On November 27 – 29, 2010, Sudan will host the International Conference on Reproductive Health Management. The International Secretariat for this regularly convened traveling event is in the Philippines. The Sudan sponsors are UNFPA, the Federal Ministry of Health and local businesses.

Sudan has poor reproductive and neonatal health indicators largely due to decades of war and conflict and poor infrastructure.  Hosting this event in Khartoum will mean an influx of ideas and experiences from other countries and the forging of partnerships for technical assistance in service delivery, management and implementation research.

The structure and themes of the Conference include: Addressing unmet need for family planning, community mobilization for reproductive health, meeting the needs of health workers, health financing, safe motherhood, women focused service delivery, social aspects of reproductive health, and reproductive health in emergency situations.

Abstracts of presentations or full papers may be sent to the Scientific Committee headed by Professor Mohammed A. El Sheikh as soon as possible:

E-mail: info@icrhmsudan.com

Telephone: +249 9053111290

Fax: +249 183780445

The papers can be on any of the themes mentioned above and may be a review of global or regional experiences or a report on a specific situation that is relevant and adaptable to Sudan. There are also opportunities for training workshops and poster presentations as well as display spaces for publications.

If a paper is accepted the author/presenter will be fully sponsored to attend the conference with economy class airfare, local transportation and accommodation at the five- star Bourj Al Fatih Hotel & Conference Centre on the shores of the Nile. Entry visa will be arranged through the Ministry of Health and Consular sections of Sudan Embassies worldwide.

For further information please visit the conference website: www.icrhmsudan.com

You can also access more information at the Republic of Sudan Federal Ministry of Health site: www.fmoh.gov.sd

Click here for a PowerPoint presentation that outlines the goals and objectives of the conference.

  • Share/Bookmark

DFID Launches Public Consultation on Reproductive, Maternal and Newborn Health

Thursday, July 29th, 2010 by KateMitch

Banner-choice-for-women (2)

Earlier this week, the Department for International Development (DFID) announced a public consultation focused on reproductive, maternal and newborn health. The goal of the consultation is to gather views and opinions from around the world to inform their forthcoming business plan for improving reproductive, maternal and neonatal health.

“We particularly want to hear what people in the UK and around the world have to say on the subject of reproductive, maternal and newborn health. We want to know more about your views, opinions and experiences. This will help us to understand different viewpoints, how these issues might vary in different countries, and how DFID could work better with partners….”

There are four ways to participate in the public consultation: take a short survey, provide in-depth feedback, email a response, or facilitate a group discussion.

Click here to participate–and to learn more about how the consultation works.

Click here to read more about the forthcoming business plan for reproductive, maternal and neonatal health.

  • Share/Bookmark

Global Maternal Health Conference 2010: July 6th Update

Tuesday, July 6th, 2010 by KateMitch

gmhc image

From the Global Maternal Health Conference 2010 co-organizers: The Public Health Foundation of India and the Maternal Health Task Force at EngenderHealth.

An exciting program for the Global Maternal Health Conference is taking shape.  The conference will cover 6 themes:  maternal health interventions and programs, underlying factors affecting maternal health, measurement–trends and methods, reproductive health, health systems, and policy and advocacy.

Registration for a limited number of participants will open July 15. Check here for updates.

  • Share/Bookmark

G8 and G20 Roundup: Promises, Protestors, and Promoting Maternal and Child Health

Tuesday, June 29th, 2010 by KateMitch

Amy Boldosser, a member of Family Care International’s global advocacy team, was in Toronto from Thursday through Sunday, for the G8 and G20 summits.  Amy’s coverage of the summits is being posted on Blog 4 Global Health, RH Reality Check, and the MHTF Blog.

Written by Amy Boldosser

(June 29th, 2010) The G8 and G20 Summits wrapped up after a tumultuous weekend. The protesters clashing with police got all the press but there were important developments for maternal and child health, HIV/AIDS and reproductive health as well.

The G8 released the details of its Muskoka Initiative for Maternal and Child Health on Saturday, a five-year, $7.3 billion package for improving maternal, newborn and child health and increasing access to reproductive health. The G8 countries have pledged US $5 billion of new money over the next 5 years and an additional $2.3 billion has been committed by non-G8 member states and foundations including the Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, the Gates Foundation and the United Nations Foundation. The communiqué notes that the G8 countries “fully expect” to mobilize more than $10 billion between 2010 and 2015 but doesn’t provide details on where that extra money might come from.

The G8 members call this “a comprehensive and integrated approach to accelerate progress towards MDGs 4 and 5 that will significantly reduce the number of maternal, newborn and under five child deaths in developing countries.” The G8 is working with partners to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015 with a particular focus on MDGs 4 (Reduce by two-thirds the under-5 mortality rate by 2015) and MDG 5 (Reduce by three-quarters the maternal mortality ratio by AND achieve, by 2015, universal access to reproductive health). MDG 5 is farthest away from being achieved by 2015 and estimates are that another $20 billion is needed if we hope to reach those targets for reduction in maternal and child mortality and reproductive health access in time. The Muskoka Initiative doesn’t come close to meeting that $20 billion shortfall, but it is a start.

While the funds committed may not have been all we hoped for, there were some pleasant surprises in the communiqué details.  The funds will support strengthened country-led national health systems in developing countries and will help them to deliver key interventions along the continuum of care from pre-pregnancy, to pregnancy, to childbirth, to infancy and early childhood. The funds can specifically be used for programs on pre-natal care; attended childbirth; postpartum care; sexual and reproductive health care and services, including voluntary family planning; health education; treatment and prevention of diseases including infectious diseases; prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV; immunizations; basic nutrition and relevant actions in the field of safe drinking water and sanitation. The communiqué for the first time ever commits G8 countries to “promote integration of HIV and sexual and reproductive health, rights and services within the broader context of strengthening health systems.” The mere inclusion of the phrase “sexual and reproductive health and rights” in a G8 communiqué seems like cause for celebration to me!

The G8’s recognition that there’s a need for money for a range of critical, complementary interventions is important as well. As the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health points out in its statement on the G8, “hemorrhage is the biggest reason why women die after delivery, but with HIV at the root of 20 percent of maternal deaths globally — and higher in Africa — it is clear that we must take a wider view of health, as women themselves do.” The communiqué also included a commitment to work towards universal access to prevention, treatment, care and support for HIV and AIDS and to continue to support funding the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria.  G8 governments also express support for strengthening health information systems and sharing of innovations such as using mobile phones to provide health information and task shifting to make better use of scarce health workers.

Notably missing from the communiqué, not surprisingly, was any mention of abortion. Protestors on the streets of Toronto were seen carrying a banner that read, “Maternal health includes abortion!” but this fact was not recognized anywhere in the Muskoka Initiative. Unsafe abortions account for 13 percent of all maternal deaths worldwide and complications from the 19.7 million unsafe abortions performed annually are a serious public health threat.  The communiqué addresses sexual and reproductive health care and services, but fails to recognize that safe abortion, when and where legal, is a critical piece of women’s healthcare access.

As the Summits concluded, new voices were added to the call for continued support for maternal and child health including the crucial voices of youth and developing country governments (with a rock star thrown in for good measure). The delegates to the official international youth summit being held concurrently with the G-8 and G-20 summits issued a statement calling on G8 leaders to “move quickly in creating a long-term maternal and child health plan for developing countries,” and identified lack of specialist training in the developing world surrounding prenatal and newborn care, and access to essential obstetric expertise as causes they would like to see the G8 take up.

Leaders from Algeria, Ethiopia, Malawi (Chair of the African Union), Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa were invited to meet with the G8 in a special afternoon session to discuss maternal and child health, highlighting the important role of developing countries themselves in this process.  The communiqué indicates that, “G8 and African leaders recognize that the attainment of the MDGs is a shared responsibility and that strategies based on mutual accountability are essential going forward.”

African Union countries have already committed to devoting 15 percent of their budgets to health and we hope that this new working relationship with the G8 will signal willingness to meet and exceed those commitments. At the G20 Summit, leaders of the world’s 20 largest economies also recognized the role that all governments, including developing country governments, must play in supporting maternal and child health initiatives. While it was disappointing that the G20 did not specifically mention the Muskoka Initiative, it did announce that it is forming a Working Group to examine how it can play a greater role in development issues-a step in the right direction.

Not be outdone, Bono, U2 lead singer and co-founder of ONE, issued a statement saying that:

Prime Minister Harper’s plan for the G8 on maternal mortality is not everything that’s needed to tackle the moral affront of millions of mothers dying in childbirth, but it is a start on a job that world leaders need to finish when they gather at the UN in September for a special session on the Millennium Development Goals.

So what can be achieved with the money and the political commitments that we did manage to get from the G8 and G20? The communiqué says that this funding will help developing countries to prevent 1.3 million deaths of children under the age of five, prevent 64,000 maternal deaths, and enable access to modern methods of family planning by an additional 12 million couples.

Along with the G8’s stated new focus on accountability, the funding targets and promises to monitor progress towards achieving reductions in maternal and child mortality and expanded access to reproductive health services will also give advocates specifics that we can hold the G8 accountable for. Finally, as we move towards the September 2010 UN High-Level Plenary Meeting on the MDGs where governments will be asked to make additional renewed commitments to achieve the MDGs by 2015, this focus on maternal and child health is important. The Secretary General of the UN has launched a Joint Action Plan to Improve the Health of Women and Children, and advocates are pressing for the serious financial and political commitments that will be needed to achieve the goals.

The G8 and G20 have helped put maternal and child health on the map at this critical time. But awareness raising and promises are not enough. The protestors on the streets were yelling, “Whose streets? Our streets!” We must take up the call, “Whose lives? Women’s lives!” No woman should have to die giving life. We know what to do to improve maternal and child health. The governments of the G8 and G20 put themselves forward as the richest and most powerful leaders in the world. But that leadership won’t mean anything if they won’t commit to saving women and children’s lives.

  • Share/Bookmark

Inside the Global Health Initiative

Wednesday, June 23rd, 2010 by KateMitch

Written by Tim Thomas, Advisor to the Maternal Health Task Force

Our friends at the Global Health program at the Council on Foreign Relations recently distributed a report of what they’ve learned about the new-ish US Global Health Initiative with a bias toward girls and women, which both President Obama and Secretary-of-State Clinton have touted as a keystone of their administration’s foreign policy.

The governance and structure of the GHI has been a topic of conversation and concern for those of us working in global health, and this excerpt from the June 18th CFR Global Health Update provides some welcome clarity:

“Don Shriber of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said the governance of the Global Health Initiative has (finally) been hammered out in a form that ultimately lets the buck stop with Jack Lew, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources. Beneath Lew will be an Overarching Strategic Council, composed of USAID, the State Department, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), HHS, the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) and the Treasury Department. It will meet monthly to assess the global health efforts. Answering to that Council will be the trifecta of leadership over the GHI: Rajiv Shah (head of USAID), Thomas Frieden (Director of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), and Ambassador Eric Goosby (head of PEPFAR/U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator).

“Eight countries will serve as learning laboratories for innovation and new policy initiatives by the Obama administration’s Global Health Initiative. The countries…are:  Bangladesh, Malawi, Rwanda, Nepal, Guatemala, Ethiopia, Kenya and Mali.

They constitute the ‘GHI-Plus’ countries, which will get the closest, and presumably best-funded, attention from the new trifecta of the Executive Branch’s $63 billion, six-year Global Health Initiative. Overall, the GHI is unfolding on various scales in a total of 81 countries. Amie Batson, of USAID, said the GHI-Plus countries were selected based on in-country enthusiasm, democracy-building, potential for cross-sector integration of innovative programs and the presence of other donor partners – chiefly, the International Health Partnership (Norway and the United Kingdom, primarily), the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI) program.”

The  distribution of funding in the GHI among health sectors remains a bit of a mystery.  According to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s analysis of the President’s FY 2011 Budget Request to Congress, PEPFAR and Malaria account for 81% or $51billion, and “Other Global Health Priorities” account for 19% or $12 billion.  MNCH and nutrition are slated for 9% and family planning/reproductive health are down for 6%.  But there are down-stream funding mechanisms that may confuse this allocation. As the Global Fund, GAVI and other multilateral donors that will receive much of the GHI funding increasingly exhort about the value of multi-sectoral, integrated approaches within their vertical funding structures, the question lingers of whether or not the GHI will restrict any of its contributions to maternal, sexual, and reproductive health and how/if those restrictions will be accounted for in the GHI budget.

Stay tuned as more on the GHI unfolds….we’ll keep you posted.

  • Share/Bookmark