Article, Study Address U.S. Global Reproductive Health Policies, Including Mexico City Policy
Guttmacher Institute: The Unprecedented Expansion of the Global Gag Rule: Trampling Rights, Health and Free Speech
Zara Ahmed, associate director for federal issues with the Guttmacher Institute, discusses U.S. policies related to reproductive health globally, including the Trump administration’s reinstated and expanded Mexico City policy, the Helms Amendment, and the Global Health, Empowerment and Rights (HER) Act, which has been introduced in both the House and Senate and would permanently repeal the Mexico City policy. Ahmed concludes, “By enacting the Global HER Act and repealing the Helms Amendment, as well as appropriating more funding for international reproductive health initiatives, the United States could once again be the world’s leader on sexual and reproductive health and rights…” (4/28).
PLOS ONE: Investigating the early impact of the Trump Administration’s Global Gag Rule on sexual and reproductive health service delivery in Uganda
Margaret Giorgio, senior research scientist with the Guttmacher Institute, and colleagues examine the early impact of the Trump administration’s Mexico City policy on sexual and reproductive health services in Uganda. The authors observed “no immediate impact of the [Mexico City policy, also known as the global gag rule or GGR,] on the provision of long-acting reversible contraceptives, contraceptive stock-outs, mobile outreach services, service integration, or quality of care. We did observe a significant impact of the policy on the average number of [community health workers (CHWs)], with ‘more exposed’ facilities engaging 3.8 fewer CHWs post-GGR … The reduction in CHWs could reduce contraceptive use and increase unintended pregnancies in Uganda. The lack of other significant findings may not be surprising given the short post-GGR observation window. Rapid organizational responses and stopgap funding from foreign governments may have mitigated any immediate impacts on service delivery in the short term. The true impact may not be felt for many years, as stopgap funding potentially ebbs and service providers adapt to new funding environments” (4/28).