While the negotiations of the Conference on Population and Development (CPD) at the United Nations (UN) go on behind closed doors, advocates of every stripe gather outside to stand watch, provide any assistance delegates may need on possible language and strategy, and try to get their issues on the table up until the very last second.

It is no surprise then that on the second morning of negotiations during the 42nd session of the CPD, which took place March 30-April 3, sexual and reproductive health and rights advocates were on our way to the hall outside of the negotiation room.  However, when we arrived every bench immediately in front on the negotiation room was commandeered by none other than the representatives from conservative Family Watch International (FWI) and Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM).  There weren't many of them, but they had spread themselves out as to not leave one seat available.  And, while this may seem like a minute and trivial detail, as we all know from West Side Story, turf is important.

Little did the FWI and C-FAM folks know, the tide was about to change.  Not long after we arrived, delegates began to stream out of the negotiation room.  While the representatives from FWI and C-FAM stuck to their positions, the rest of us followed the herd.  When we arrived at what was to be the new negotiation room, there were benches aplenty, and we promptly arranged seating and set up shop. While the issues we were there to advocate on behalf of were certainly serious, this humorous scene mirrored the proceeding inside: you never know where you will end up in the end.

This story is a children's ride compared to the rollercoaster that was going on inside the negotiation room.  Luckily, the delegates were able to come to a resolution, but only after plenty of ups and downs. Per the direction of this year's theme for the CPD, delegates were tasked with assessing "The contribution of the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development to the internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals." The CPD serves to inform and advise the UN's Economic and Social Council, offering its recommendations in the final Resolution of the meeting. 

While the Conference debated issues such as the status of civil society organizations in relationship to governments and perceptions of international migration's impact generated some controversy, the most contentious issues by far related to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR).  Unequivocal in their position on SRHR, the Holy See, as represented by Permanent Observer of the Holy See, Archbishop Celestino Migliore, accused "the very institution which launched the MDGs...[of] giving priority to population control and getting the poor to accept these arrangements rather than primarily focusing on [the MDGs] commitments to addressing education, health care, access to water, sanitation and employment."  Such claims of championing the rights of others, while dismissing attention to their sexual and reproductive health needs as merely "population control," represent a dogmatic adherence to ideology rather than a call to fulfill their human rights.

Even the phrase "sexual and reproductive health and rights" aroused passionate debate.  Family Watch International, whose mission is to "preserve and promote the family, based on marriage between a man and a woman as the societal unit that provides the best outcome for men, women and children" has attempted to confuse the issue by claiming that "sexual rights," could be used to "promote abortion, homosexuality, transsexuality, prostitution, pedophilia, pornography etc."   This "slippery slope" fallacy is meaningless and offensive, and, while such fearmongering might generate a few additional donations among their followers, it clearly would not stand up in legitimate negotiations.  While the draft Resolution during the final plenary include the phrase "sexual and reproductive health and rights" and appeared to have consensus, in the final hour the delegation from Iran refuted the inclusion of "sexual and reproductive health and rights" stating that there is not agreed upon language on the definition of "sexual rights."  In the end it was replaced with the language, "sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights."

While the final Resolution presented some problematic language regarding adolescents, there were clearly some breakthroughs.  The Resolution incorporated key language from the Platform for Action from the Fourth World Conference on Women, stating that women have the right "to have control over and decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality, including sexual and reproductive health, free of coercion, discrimination and violence."  It is simply amazing how such few words embrace such an expansive notion as free will, responsibility and self-determination.  Regardless of how divisive right-wing factions can be in such matters, whether as part of country delegations or NGOs jockeying on the sidelines, their arguments that SRHR are outside of the human rights framework, at the most extreme, or that they are somehow subjugated in a false hierarchy of rights, ultimately find a dead end.  Picking and choosing parts of the wide range of human needs, and placing them in competition with one another, directly violates the foundation of human rights, which recognizes the "equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family."