Are Sexual and Reproductive Health Policies Designed for All? Vulnerable Groups in Policy Documents of Four European Countries and Their Involvement in Policy Development

Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 International Centre for Reproductive Health (ICRH), Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

2 Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Institute of Public Health, Department of International Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

3 School of Global Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Abstract

Background
Health policies are important instruments for improving population health. However, experience suggests that policies designed for the whole population do not always benefit the most vulnerable. Participation of vulnerable groups in the policy-making process provides an opportunity for them to influence decisions related to their health, and also to exercise their rights. This paper presents the findings from a study that explored how vulnerable groups and principles of human rights are incorporated into national sexual and reproductive health (SRH) policies of 4 selected countries (Spain, Scotland, Republic of Moldova, and Ukraine). It also aimed at discussing the involvement of vulnerable groups in SRH policy development from the perspective of policymakers.
 
Methods
Literature review, health policy analysis and 5 semi-structured interviews with policy-makers were carried out in this study. Content analysis of SRH policies was performed using the EquiFrame analytical framework.
 
Results
The study revealed that vulnerable groups and core principles of human rights are differently addressed in SRH policies within 4 studied countries. The opinions of policy-makers on the importance of mentioning vulnerable groups in policy documents and the way they ought to be mentioned varied, but they agreed that a clear definition of vulnerability, practical examples, and evidences on health status of these groups have to be included. In addition, different approaches to vulnerable group’s involvement in policy development were identified during the interviews and the range of obstacles to this process was discussed by respondents.
 
Conclusion
Incorporation of vulnerable groups in the SRH policies and their involvement in policy development were found to be important in addressing SRH of these groups and providing an opportunity for them to advocate for equal access to healthcare and exercise their rights. Future research on this topic should include representatives of vulnerable communities which could help to build a dialogue and present the problem from multiple perspectives.

Highlights

Commentaries Published on this Paper

  • Policies and Processes for Social Inclusion: Using EquiFrame and EquIPP for Policy Dialogue; Comment on “Are Sexual and Reproductive Health Policies Designed for All? Vulnerable Groups in Policy Documents of Four European Countries and Their Involvement in Policy Development”

          Abstract | PDF

  • In Search of the Third Eye, When the Two Others Are Shamefacedly Shut?; Comment on “Are Sexual and Reproductive Health Policies Designed for All? Vulnerable Groups in Policy Documents of Four European Countries and Their Involvement in Policy Development”

          Abstract | PDF

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. Aday LA. At Risk in America: The Health and Health Care Needs of Vulnerable Populations in the United States. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2002.
  2. Chatterjee CB, Sheoran G. Vulnerable Groups in India. Mumbai, India: Centre for Enquiry into Health and Allied Themes; 2007.
  3. World Health Organization (WHO). The Right to Health Fact Sheet No. 31. Geneva:WHO; 2008.
  4. Grear A, Fineman MA. Vulnerability: Reflections on a New Ethical Foundation for Law and Politics. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd; 2014.
  5. Economic U, Council S. General comment no. 14: the Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health (Art. 12 of the Covenant). Geneva: UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; 2000.
  6. VanRooy G, Amadhila E, Mannan H, McVeigh J, MacLachlan M, Amin M. Core concepts of human rights and inclusion of vulnerable groups in the Namibian Policy on Orthopaedic Technical Services. Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development. 2012;23(3):24-47. doi:10.5463/dcid.v23i3.132
  7. Braveman P, Gruskin S. Defining equity in health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003;57(4):254-258. doi:10.1136/jech.57.4.254
  8. World Health Organization (WHO). The Tallinn Charter: Health Systems for Health and Wealth. Geneva: WHO; 2008.
  9. Whitehead M. The concepts and principles of equity and health. Int J Health Serv. 1992;22(3):429-445. doi:10.2190/986l-lhq6-2vte-yrrn
  10. World Health Organization (WHO). Health 2020: a European policy framework supporting action across government and society for health and well-being. Geneva: WHO, Proceedings of Regional Committee for Europe; 2012:10-13.
  11. Cottingham J, Kismodi E, Hilber AM, Lincetto O, Stahlhofer M, Gruskin S. Using human rights for sexual and reproductive health: improving legal and regulatory frameworks. Bull World Health Organ. 2010;88(7):551-555. doi:10.2471/blt.09.063412
  12. World Health Organization (WHO). Community participation in local health and sustainable development: Approaches and techniques. Geneva: WHO; 2002.
  13. United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Making Reproductive Rights and Sexual and Reproductive Health a Reality for All. UNFPA; 2008.
  14. World Health Organization (WHO). Reproductive Health Strategy to Accelerate Progress Towards the Attainment of International Development Goals and Targets. Geneva: WHO; 2004.
  15. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO Regional Strategy on Sexual and Reproductive Health: Reproductive Health/Pregnancy Programme. Geneva: World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe; 2001.
  16. Colombini M, Mayhew SH, Rechel B. Sexual and Reproductive Health Needs and Access to Services for Vulnerable Groups in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. New York: UNFPA; 2011.
  17. Mannan H, Amin M, MacLachlan M, Consortium E. The EquiFrame Manual. Dublin: The Global Health Press; 2011.
  18. Stowe MJ, Turnbull HR. Tools for Analyzing Policy "on the Books" and Policy "on the Streets". J Disabil Policy Stud. 2001;12(3):206-216. doi:10.1177/104420730101200306
  19. 19.   Amin M, MacLachlan M, Mannan H, et al. EquiFrame: a framework for analysis of the inclusion of human rights and vulnerable groups in health policies. Health Hum Rights. 2011;13(2):1-20.
  20. Mannan H, Eltayeb S, Maclachlan M, et al. Core concepts of human rights and inclusion of vulnerable groups in the mental health policies of Malawi, Namibia, and Sudan. Int J Ment Health Syst. 2013;7(1):7. doi:10.1186/1752-4458-7-7
  21. Rodriguez-Garcia R, Russell J. Legislation and policy for adolescent health in Latin America and the Caribbean. Rev Panam Salud Publica 1999;5(2):12-17.
  22. Gilson L. Health Policy and Systems Research: a Methodology Reader. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012.
  23. Schopper D, Lormand JD. Developing Policies to Prevent Injuries and Violence. Geneva: WHO; 2006.
  24. Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(9):1277-1288.  doi:10.1177/1049732305276687
  25. Schneider M, Eide AH, Amin M, MacLachlan M, Mannan H. Inclusion of vulnerable groups in health policies: Regional policies on health priorities in Africa. African Journal of Disability. 2013;2(1):9. doi:10.4102/ajod.v2i1.40
  26. Hamburg DA. Habits for health. Paper presented at: World health forum; 1987.
  27. Labonte R. Community empowerment: the need for political analysis. Can J Public Health 1988;80(2):87-91.
  28. Zakus JDL, Lysack CL. Revisiting community participation. Health Policy Plan. 1998;13(1):1-12. doi:10.1093/heapol/13.1.1
  29. Richmond JB, Kotelchuck M. Co-ordination and development of strategies and policy for public health promotion in the United States. In: Walter W. Holland WW, Detels R, Knox G, eds. Oxford Textbook of Public Health. Oxford (UK). Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications; 1991:441-454.
  30. Hinkel J. “Indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity”: Towards a clarification of the science–policy interface. Glob Environ Change. 2011;21(1):198-208.
  31. Mutua M. Change in the Human Rights Universe. Harv Hum Rts J. 2007;20:3.
  32. Mutua M. Human rights in Africa: the limited promise of liberalism. Afr Stud Rev. 2008;51(1):17-39. doi:10.1353/arw.0.0031
  33. Alwang J, Siegel PB, Jorgensen SL. Vulnerability: a view from different disciplines: Social protection discussion paper series; 2001.
  34. Braveman P, Gruskin S. Poverty, equity, human rights and health. Bull World Health Organ. 2003;81(7):539-545.
  35. Flaskerud JH, Winslow BJ. Conceptualizing vulnerable populations health-related research. Nurs Res. 1998;47(2):69-78. doi:10.1097/00006199-199803000-00005