Among the first executive orders signed by President Obama upon taking to office were eliminating the so-called "Global Gag Rule" and restoring American funding for the United Nations Population Fund to provide international family planning assistance.  I think we all would applaud these two moves, however I cannot but help shake the feeling that this brings us to where we were in 2000.  For the past eight years activist communities have been organized around achieving these twin goals.  Now that they have been met what else should the Obama administration do to promote the health and welfare of women worldwide?

This post is part of the After the Gag Rule salon hosted by RH Reality Check and UN Dispatch.

I'll take a shot at going first.

There is a reason that George Lucas made prequels to the Stars Wars saga instead of sequels. What exactly do you do once the evil empire is gone? The opportunity we have mirrors the opportunity that the US has in general. We spent an enormous amount of time and energy fighting bad policy. Suddenly, that weight has been lifted. How do we keep our momentum going in a world where we can move forward instead of just trying to avoid sliding back?

I think the answer is to set, and publicize, some ambitious yet achievable goals. We have an opportunity here, but we need something to rally around. Many problems affecting women have solutions that have been proven to work. In particular, getting girls into school and reducing maternal mortality are ripe for serious attention. What we need to do now is push hard to get funding and prioritize education for girls and safer motherhood.  Setting challenging targets would be one way to do that.

This post is part of the After the Gag Rule salon hosted by RH Reality Check and UN Dispatch.

I agree wholeheartedly with Alanna about the difficulty -- and importance -- of getting out of our defensive crouch and setting a proactive agenda. At the same time, we already have an agenda for women's health and rights -- the ICPD Program of Action -- that remains unfinished. The goals of the ICPD remain as urgent as they were 15 years ago when the document was hammered out in Cairo.

The reasons why the ICPD agenda remains unfinished would fill quite a few blog posts. But I do think we have new opportunities to reinvigorate support for that agenda. Today, there is a remarkable alignment of interests among those working for women's rights and health, youth empowerment, global justice and environmental protection. The ICPD agenda is central to all of those concerns -- and there is much to be gained by building new alliances with these movements.

I know this is fraught; many of us in the women's rights and health movement are understandably wary of those who approach reproductive health with other motivations. There is a real danger, for example, that concerns about population growth and the environment could take us back to the days of "population control." That is a danger we must tackle head-on, but it should not deter us from making alliances with environmentalists and others. The greatest danger right now is of not going forward and accomplishing the critically important goals set forth in the ICPD.

This post is part of the After the Gag Rule salon hosted by RH Reality Check and UN Dispatch.

By overturning the Global Gag Rule and reinstating UNFPA funding, the Obama Administration has taken immediate actions to ensure the rights and reproductive health of women and girls.  But a lot of day-in, day-out slogging is being - and will have to continue to be - done.  And, there are quite a few things that must be undone - for example, the Administration's bold move to repeal the HHS regulations initiated by the Bush Administration.

The US can stand tall at this week's UN Conference on Population and Development to secure consensus on a robust action agenda for the world and for U.S. foreign assistance:

• Prioritizing U.S. investment in comprehensive reproductive health services, defined at the ICPD, including care during pregnancy and childbirth, access to contraceptives and safe abortion, and diagnosis and treatment of sexually transmitted infections and HIV/AIDS.
• Ensuring access to comprehensive sexuality education that teaches young people how to establish equality in relationships, respect the right to consent in sex and marriage, and end violence and sexual coercion.
• Promoting and protecting the human rights of women at the United Nations and in bilateral relations with other governments.

As Alana says, we know what to do, and as Laurie suggests, we are mobilizing effective alliances for this era of opportunity.

This post is part of the After the Gag Rule salon hosted by RH Reality Check and UN Dispatch.

As Mark mentioned, we've seen a great start from the Obama administration. It repealed the global gag rule, and reaffirmed American commitment to women's health and global health. Talking the right talk is exactly what we need to do. Now that we've said all the right things, though, it's time to prove we mean what we say.

Over the last eight years, European governments dug deep to try to replace the funding for women's health - UNFPA in particular - that didn't come from the US. If we want to regain our global leadership role on women's health, we need more than words. We need to prove our commitment by paying our fair share. Rhetoric means nothing if we don't back it up with resources.

It’s hard to ramp up funding in the face of economic crisis. It’s also essential. Margaret Chan pointed out in February that women and children are going to be hardest by the damage to our global economy. Leadership in this context means making sure that the programs are in place to ameliorate that impact. That means good planning, evidence-based program design, and a multi-sectoral approach. But more than anything else, it means adequate funding.

This post is part of the After the Gag Rule salon hosted by RH Reality Check and UN Dispatch.

All:

I think one way the US -- by way of the White House -- can retake a leadership role in promoting international family planning and women's health during this time of global economic crisis is to build a small army of Social Change Volunteers who would be a modern version of Peace Corp volunteers. And one possible market for volunteers are students, those who want to take a semester abroad, those who aren't finding work in this economy and may consider taking time abroad or even mid-career workers who want to be involved in social change.

Sponsored by the White House, it could be implemented by the UN, but have the signature of the President or the First Lady, much the way JFK kicked off the Peace Corps. The work would focus on fighting poverty by raising the status of women, empowering with training or funds or organization to help them manage their families, the way numerous very good on-the-ground programs are operating.

This post is part of the After the Gag Rule salon hosted by RH Reality Check and UN Dispatch.

I love the idea of harvesting the energy, knowledge, and creativity of the people affected by the economic crisis. I know that we've seen volunteering increase all over the country as people seek to use their time in a positive way. I wonder, though, if creating a new organization is the most effective way of improving the lives of women throughout the world.

Starting a new enterprise is time-consuming and faces a steep learning curve as the new effort gets going. In addition, I suspect that it would be hard to find countries to host social change volunteers. Governments are made up of people who benefit from the status quo; how would we convince them to accept an influx of Americans determined to be change agents? In addition, identifying people with the skills and background to effectively improve women’s health and support social change will be very difficult. That’s not a skill set that is easy to acquire.

Maybe we could build on existing structures, and channel additional human energy through them; they are already set up to select skilled people and match them to need. We could expand Peace Corps, for example, and gear it more toward woman. Peace Corps volunteers already tend to be women; maybe a woman-to-woman program could be designed? PCVs could run community women’s groups, and provide education on relevant topics. We could also encourage Americans (or subsidize) to become United Nations volunteers, which would also show a new American commitment to multilateralism. Lastly, I think the new Global Health Corps is an exciting experiment in connecting young people to global health leadership opportunities.

I totally agree with you, Alanna, that building on existing infrastructure is key; a totally new enterprise is definitely not in the cards at this point, and I certainly didn't mean to imply that. It would be great to build a consensus within the UN or the State Department to transform or update the Peace Corp program, but instead of "promoting peace," the mandate would be "social change" or whatever characterization is most compelling. But modernizing the Peace Corp would be critical because it represents an earlier time and the image of rejuvenation is useful here. I think you'd also get more volunteers on campuses across the country that way, as well. The UN would have to find different projects from the ones they currently have, but they are constantly doing that and they already have the relationships. There also are many programs -- even privately sponsored ones-- out there that already operate outside of the UN that can use volunteer help, so it's more a task of cataloguing and searching, rather than building from ground zero.

I think that creating a sense of civic responsibility on the local and global level is an extremely important value to instill in people. Especially in times of economic hardship, it is important that people feel useful and engaged with their communities and the world at large. As an activist who has volunteered much of my time over the years to causes I believe in, I know that creating change and working with others to do so is a really powerful thing. However, I also think that the especially in a situation like Alanna suggests, with a woman-to-woman kind of exchange, it’s important to think about the impact volunteering has on the value of women’s labor.

The theme of the 53rd Commission on the Status of Women, which took place at the beginning of March at the United Nations, was, "the equal sharing of responsibilities between women and men, including caregiving in the context of HIV/AIDS.” It’s important to think about this when considering infrastructure and volunteer opportunities, especially for women. Part of equal sharing of responsibilities means establishing standards for compensation and other forms of support and recognition for women’s work, especially in the caretaking context.

I thought I might stir in another prompt by sending you all a release from IWHC last night, which includes remarks made on the floor of the UN by the US at the Commission on Population and Development:

Today, at the United Nations the United States expressed its renewed and deep commitment to the goals and aspirations included in the International Conference on Population Program of Action and Development (ICPD) and the Key Actions of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs):

 

"Ladies and Gentlemen, our common task this week is vital.  Five years remain in both the ICPD and the MDG mandates.  We can, this week, commit to stronger actions to reach our common goals.  We must do much more to provide comprehensive, accurate information and education on sexuality, sexual and reproductive health for women, men, girls, and boys as they age and their needs evolve.  We must, as well, foster equal partnerships and sharing of responsibilities in all areas of family life, including in sexual and reproductive life, and promote frank discourse on sexuality, including in relation to sexual health and reproduction.  We must also acknowledge the direct link between population rates, fertility, and the ability to reach development outcomes.

"We need to prioritize comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services, as defined in the Programme of Action and the Key Actions for its further implementation, in our work to strengthen health systems.  The cluster of services agreed in the Program of Action is all essential to save women's lives and protect their health as well as protect their reproductive rights."

 

World governments meet this week to consider and come to agreement on committing the resources and political will to protect and promote health and rights in the remaining five years of the ICPD. The United States statement today is part of the Obama Administration's commitment to work with other nations to both promote its security interests and meet the global challenges of the 21st century.   

"It is our hope that the courage of the United States on behalf of the rights and health of the world's women will influence our governments to act equally strongly," said Nirvana Gonzalez of the  Latin American and Caribbean Women's Health Network.   "The position of the United States is a clear demonstration of the separation of church and state and for our region in particular, this is substantial in supporting the right of all of our people to exercise their citizenship.  Now we wait to see their commitment translate into actions."

 

Reactions to this?  A stronger statement than we expected?