UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, does not support coercion or abortion. It follows the mandate of the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) which clearly states that reproductive health-care programmes should provide the widest range of services without any form of coercion. All couples and individuals have the basic right to decide freely and responsibly the number and spacing of their children and to have the information, education and means to do so. In addition, the global community has decides that abortion should never be promoted as a method of family planning.

UNFPA’s commitment to these ideals has had real impact. Evidence indicates that abortion rates are lower in regions where UNFPA has implemented voluntary family planning programming, including in China.

China’s citizens have benefited from the presence of the UNFPA and the initiatives that it has brought to the nation. In the parts of China where UNFPA works, as in other nations where UNFPA works, women are given more options for their reproductive health decisions, more information about the reproductive health care available to them, and the freedom to access it.

In the implementation of its “one-child policy”, China has in some parts of the country condoned gross violations of its citizen’s human rights through coercive abortions and forced sterilizations. The United States has withheld funds Congress intended for UNFPA based on the faulty assumption that UNFPA’s assistance to China equates with tacit support for coercive practices.

What is faulty about this assumption? The US government’s own investigation found “… no evidence that UNFPA has knowingly supported or participated in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization in the PRC [People’s Republic of China].” The US government’s team also recommended that UNFPA be given the full $34 million that was withheld.

Everyone has concerns about China’s approach to family planning, including UNFPA. UNFPA is on the record stating that the “one-child policy” is coercive and should be eliminated. UNFPA’s small demonstration project in China is designed to move China away from a top-down approach to family planning in favor of a rights-based approach.

UNFPA’s country programme in China has also shown positive results including an increase in quality of care including wider range of contraceptive options and a marked increase in gynecological and prenatal visits in the selected program counties. Moreover, where UNFPA is working, the abortion rate has dropped to levels lower in the United States. UNFPA has also promoted important advocacy campaigns including promoting the rights of the girl child, increasing awareness on HIV/AIDS prevention and highlighting the harmful societal impact of sex-selection abortion.

If the United States is a concerned as it says it is about coerced abortion and sterilizations in China, as the world’s super power more should be done to confront it than withholding funds from UNFPA. However, the US State Department’s country profile of China states that the United States traded over $201.6 billion dollars with China in 2005. The paltry $34 million for UNFPA being withheld pales in comparison – but it does look like an inexpensive way to appease a political constituency of the Administration’s.

The Administration’s decision has an enormous impact on the rest of the world as well. Estimates are that each year it withholds the $34 million, the Administration is blocking funding that would prevent 2 million unwanted pregnancies, nearly 800,000 induced abortions, 4,700 maternal deaths, nearly 60,000 cases of serious maternal illness, and over 77,000 infant and child deaths.

Relevant Links:

United States Report of the China UNFPA Independent Assessment Team

Official UNFPA Response to United States Funding Decision

United Kingdom finds UNFPA force for good in China