Print
Category: Front Page News Front Page News
Published: 26 October 2017 26 October 2017

By Hallie Richwine

The Public Forum on October 19 at WNMU’s Miller Library focused on the topic of “Women’s Health - Globally.” Lydia Huerta, professor of Cultural Studies and Spanish, served as the moderator. The panel included Allison Evans, WNMU professor of political science, Jeff Hill, WNMU chair of natural sciences, and Rene Romo, representative of United States Senator Tom Udall’s office.

To begin the evening Huerta explained that the Mexico City Policy is a United States government policy that blocks U.S. federal funding for non-governmental organizations that provide abortion counselling or referrals, advocate to decriminalize abortion, or expand abortion services.

The policy has been revoked and reenacted several times over the years, beginning with Ronald Reagan in 1984 and most recently reinstated under President Donald Trump. It has required foreign non-governmental organizations to certify that they will not “perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning” with non-U.S. funds as a condition for receiving U.S. global family planning assistance. Under Trump, this includes U.S. global HIV and maternal and child health assistance. Organizations that offer services that do not comply with this policy, even if they are using their own funds and those particular services are legal in their territory cannot receive aid from the United States.

Romo thanked the panel for allowing Udall’s office to make a statement and said that, “recent events make it clear that we all must take steps to protect women’s choices.” Udall’s office is working to permanently revoke the Mexico City Policy and suggests we promote progressive women into leadership roles to help protect women’s reproductive rights and access to health care.

The first question posed by Huerta was, “Why does the United States government policy govern women’s health and why?”

Evans’s reply was that there is an international level to United States involvement and "there is no world government to tell us what to do or how to spend our money."

Hill explained that he was in the Middle East for about eight years and spent time working on water quality problems. He found that in order to build a society up it was necessary to bring women up. If women are unable to control their reproduction it is difficult to help communities grow. His experience was in Afghanistan following the first conflict where he found people still drinking from open wells or drinking surface water. People in these small remote communities were unable to receive funding that impacted women and contributed to the overall wellness of the community.

Huerta followed up with, “How is it then that there are so many strings attached?”

Evans said there was some hypocrisy involved as Roe vs. Wade and Planned Parenthood vs. Casey disallow state and federal restrictions on abortion in the United States itself. The inability to easily overturn these Supreme Court decisions caused politicians that were opposed to such decisions to enact policies such as the Mexico City Policy to continue their parties’ agendas even if on foreign soil. Roe vs. Wade continues to be a national debate long after the decision was announced in 1973.

Hill added that in keeping family planning and abortion in the same category we limit how we are able to reduce abortions.

Huerta asked how the United States can set how women’s health is defined globally and how no other countries step in.

Evans and Hill both agreed that the enormity of the United States economy alone is a driving factor in how it wields its power globally. Evans pointed out that the Scandinavian countries have tried to aid countries in need but the lack of funding ultimately is where they need to step down. Hill said to put it in perspective: if California was its own country, it would be the fifth largest economy worldwide.

“Why, in 2017, does the United States hold women’s health hostage? What can we do to address the fact that we shouldn’t be handling other people’s health?” asked Huerta.

Evans said perhaps the United States needs to elect people and consider international effects when people vote. Voters should consider what the goals of the policy are versus the effects of following through on that policy. According to the World Health Organization this policy limits women’s autonomy by decreasing access to contraception, which drives up the abortion rate. This is not only counterintuitive to the goal of the policy but also contributes to maternal deaths.

Hill said all reproductive health care has gotten tied up with abortion because of ethical and religious views and "we could probably benefit from separating one issue from the other." The limits on funding even affect immunization which is a great way to prevent disease and save lives.

“So,” said Huerta, “What are reproductive rights?”

Evans said personally she believes it’s how to make decisions for yourself, when and if you want to have children. Hill agreed and added, “how many things does that one choice impact?”

Huerta added that family planning and preventative care are important and that having conversations about both brings facts to light.

Hill said that it would be great if all children were planned and the results of such discussions "could not only avoid abortion but other issues like childhood abuse."

This Public Forum topic was brought to the community by the Grant County Democratic Party and WNMU’s MEChA student association, Young Democrats, and J. Cloyd Miller Library.