Human Rights and Reproduction

Introduction

Standardization of human rights is beneficial to all people. No matter where one is in the world one has the right to expect the same standards of treatment irregardless of ones financial, racial, religious, or political status. (Then bring to head in conclusion) finding out state of the world today and how we can better support the aspiration of universal equality, and how are in an anthropologists advantageous position to facilitate this change.

The members of this research project have independently as well as collaboratively investigated the following topics concerned with reproductive rights: birth control, abortion, eugenics, and adoption. These topics are not intended to be an all-inclusive list of the issues of surrounding reproductive rights. Rather, we have chosen the four aforementioned topics because each topic is surrounded by human rights issues as well as societal anthropological implications. A notable example of this in our own country is that of abortion. Some people feel access to abortion is a right that should be upheld by the law, while others have religious and moral beliefs against maintaining abortion rights. The current German head of state is highly religious and is personally against abortion. To reduce the abortion rate, Germany has adopted the liberal social family policies of their liberal neighbor, France, that encourage family planning, sex education in schools, and tax breaks for lower income families that would other wise have no means to financially raise a child.

We hope that people all around the globe can be offered a variety of reproductive choices, support, and education so that individuals can make the best decision for themselves and ultimately their culture at large.

Thesis statement

Our research explores the current global rights of all individuals to choose to procreate, parent, or not according to personal, cultural, political and/or societal values.

Birth control / contraception

Definition Contraception is the prevention of the uniting of the egg and sperm or of the fertilized egg implanting in the uterus' lining (Merck 2003). There are basically six types of contraception used throughout the world, hormonal devices (the Pill), barrier methods (condoms), abortion, sterilization, timing methods (withdrawal),and other undocumented methods (herbs, religious practices).

Why it is an issue? Simply stated, governments often interfere with the accessibility and education regarding contraceptives. Many people world-wide, be it Catholic or Moslem, are against birth control because of moral and religious beliefs about preventing conception. Governmental funding often regulates the extent to which birth control is provided, and the existence or amount of education in schools and health services that accompanies that birth control.

Many methods of birth control are potentially available, well-established, and effective. The condom, for example, is affordable at under 50 cents in the US, when used correctly prevents pregnancy 99% of the time, and it is instrumental at reducing the risk of sexually transmitted infections, including AIDS (Merck, 2003). The problem surrounding birth control is not its effectiveness, but rather its availability and correct use. Below are three examples of countries where religious beliefs, lack of education and sparse availability infringe on the right to effective birth control methods.

US- Since the legalization of birth control in 1965, Americans have enjoyed the freedoms of family planning provided by effective modern birth control methods. However, one of the major areas of concern regarding the reproductive health in America is the trend of adolescent sexual behavior. The U.S. has the highest rate of teen pregnancy of any developed country, twice that of Canada, France, England, and Sweden, and 10 times higher than the Netherlands (Boonstra, 2004, Darroch, 2000).

This high teen pregnancy rate is attributed to the lack of comprehensive sexual education in the public school system. One in four schools in America teach an abstinence-only sex education curriculum which prohibits any discussion on contraceptive options, protection against STD's, or abortion (Darroch 2000), and rather teaches only the social, psychological, and health benefits of abstaining from sex until marriage. Unfortunately, the research examining the effectiveness of this approach shows that it simply doesn't work, and actually puts teenagers at greater risk. No study has been published in any credible journal that indicates abstinence-only education has lowered the number of sexually active teens, (currently 65% of graduating seniors) or the average age of first sexual experience (16). Comprehensive sex education students are not having any more sex or at an earlier age, but do use more protection (Darroch, 2000,2003). California, the only state to refuse abstinence only funding, has seen a 40% decrease in teen pregnancies over the past decade ("California reduces....", 2004).

Mexico- Mexico has had a government sponsored family planning program for several decades, reducing the net annual population growth rate from 3.5% to 1.4 in forty years. As recently as 1976, only 30 percent of Mexican women used any form of birth control; now some 70 percent do. This increase in birth control has greatly reduced the average number of children born. In the mid-1960s there was an average of 7.2 children born per woman, and one in eight died at birth. Today the average is 2.4 children per woman, and approximately one in every 32 infants dies at birth (HIR, 2003).

            These numbers show that family planning programs have been a success in controlling Mexico's population problem, but the numbers are unrepresentative of the current state of reproduction in the rural regions of Mexico. 44% of rural women of the reproductive age use birth control, and the average number of children each woman has is 4.7, almost twice the national average. Women with no formal education are half as likely to use birth control as the educated women (www.mexfam.org). Mexico has tried to implement a sexual education program for the public school system, but many of the girls living on farms do not go to school. Most birth control methods are offered free of cost at local drug stores, but with no knowledge of the correct use and inconvenient accessibility, many women slip through the cracks.

India-  As a nation, roughly 50 percent of the population uses some form of birth control. Of that number, sterilization is by far the most popular method, used by close to 70 percent of all birth control participants. Of the women voluntarily sterilized, 60 percent wait until they have at least two boys, or on average four children (www.asiasource.org). Despite India's best efforts, the population continues to grow at a present rate of 1.8 percent.

One problem facing policy makers is the diversity and distribution of India's population. 75% of the total population live in rural regions, which vary greatly in economic, social, and religious lifestyles. This makes a national family planning program difficult to reach the entire population effectively. Another major problem in India, preference of boys over girls. One common Indian proverb relates, "raising girls is like watering someone else's lawn." Growing up, girls receive less food, medical attention, emotional support, and education than the boys. As adults, 38 percent of women are literate, compared to 65 percent of men (Chatterjee, 2001). This only perpetuates the problem, leaving women uneducated with fewer economic options other than to marry and please her husband by producing more males. It is a vicious cycle that has roots deep in the cultural lifestyle.

Although India was one of the first nations to implement a family planning program in 1951 to help slow the growth of their large population, with the lack of success of previous programs, India's Prime Minister Indira Ghandi declared a state of population emergency in 1976 and proceeded to enact a government organized forced sterilization of millions of poor Indians. This blatant infringement of human rights caused uproar with both the citizens of India and foreign aid organizations who withdrew funding until the sterilization stopped (NFHS, 1999). The sterilization policy ended with the overthrow of the political party in power in 1977.

Abortion

Definition Abortion refers to the voluntary termination of an implanted, fertilized embryo, generally through use of surgical or pharmaceutical methods; as a result live birth does not take place. abortions that is a choice some woman are going to make regardless of its legality, government are under a moral obligation for these who make this choice

Why it is an issue? Women the world over have fought for the right to legal abortions; some succeeding and others still waiting for governmental support. Even if abortion is legal, there are many loopholes and unavailable services that undermine women's accessibility to it. Many religious groups and political organizations and governments worldwide deem abortion as an unmoral decision resulting in murder, others as a woman's right; therefore its use as method of family planning is restricted in many areas. Abortion is a prime case in point of how the right for an individual to reproduce as they choose is entangled in the powerful opinions of church and state, as exemplified below.

Russia- Russia has an abortion rate of two abortions for every live birth, giving it the second most highest abortion rate in the world behind Romania. It is legally permitted in the first trimester and up until birth for other circumstances (rape, drug abuse, one parent in jail, extreme financial crisis). In Russia, abortion is the main method of birth control for financial reasons. Abortions are provided by the government health funds if the woman is in physical, emotional, or economic danger. If a woman simply wants one, an abortion costs $5 in rural areas and $50 in Moscow, and since the average income a month is about $54, it is not difficult to see why abortion is so prevalent.

The high abortion rate in Russia is not because of political and moral acceptance or support of a women's right to family when she chooses, nor because of a hard to control population growth. In fact, www.MOSNEWS.com stated in a recent article that “the Russian Orthodox Church condemned abortion, contraception, pre- and extra-marital sexual activity for their role in Russia's `moral degradation'”. Also, Russia has had zero population growth and a decrease of life expectancy for men fall from 72 to 57 since the fall of communism (Kokovich, 2005). If political support and the absence of an overpopulation crisis are not the cause of widespread abortion, what is? Our research points to flaws in Russian sex education. Sex ed is allowed, but not enforced or funded in public schools, leading to widespread ignorance on reproductive issues. Abortion rates will not decrease in Russia until increased education, birth control availability, and economic stability take place.

US- Abortion is legal, but limited by availability of number of clinics, doctors and community awareness of these services (Welsh, 2005). Locally, the Building for Women in Duluth is one of six places in Minnesota that offer abortion service (the other five are all in the Twin Cities). The Building for Women serves 24 counties in MN, 14 in WI, 4 in MI, as well as parts of Canada. Tina Welsh, the executive director for the building for women, estimates that the average woman who receives an abortion must drive up to six hours to Duluth because abortion services in other areas of the region are so limited. Not only do women have to travel far, but the doctors have to be flown in from the cities, since the local clinics in Duluth are Catholic affiliated and do not employ doctors to do abortions. Tina Welsh also explained that economics are a huge issue in the decision for a woman to terminate her pregnancy. For example abortions increased when many mining places shut down on the Iron Range. Bush is anti-abortion, but his economic policies has cut family planning, education, and contraceptive availability which has risen the abortion from the Clinton administration, ironically so.

Many believe that the reason abortion services are limited to women is overwhelmingly due to the governmental climate with support of the religious right that is attempting to overturn Roe-v-Wade. The reasons women choose abortion in America are generally to avoid single parenthood, the inability to economically support a family, immaturity or teen-pregnancy. Half of abortions in the US occur during 8 weeks, ¾ of abortions occur within twelve weeks of fertilization. Whatever the reason people are against abortion in the US, it must be pointed out that the abortion rate has been decreasing to its its lowest point since 1970's, probably due to wide-spread distribution of contraceptives.

Mexico- Abortion is illegal in Mexico, although certain circumstances permit abortion in the first trimester such as the pregnant woman's life being in danger, rape, or incest. Still, many women undergo illegal abortion. About 1 mil-500,000 illegal abortions are given, 100,000 of them result with medical complications that must treated in hospital. Such medical complications are the 4th highest cause of mortality for women in Mexico (Planned Parenthood, 2005). The l consequence for women who have had an illegal abortion (in addition to potential health complications) can be jail time for 6 months, though this offense is not usually prosecuted.

The Yucatan is the only state that allows abortions for women, but indecently there are no abortion doctors or clinics to administer them. This double-standard is seen in the case of contraceptives as well, for they are available over the counter, but people do not know how to use them correctly (Pelayo-Woodward, 2005). Until people are educated about contraceptives and abortion become legal and thus more safe, illegal abortions unfortunately will still be a dangerous option for Mexican women.

Forced Sterilization and Eugenics

Definition. Sterilization involves surgical methods that make a person incapable of reproducing. Some people choose sterilization as a means of birth control. When this method is forced upon people deemed as “bad for the human species” such as undereducated, poor, “feeble-minded”, young, and minority women and men is becomes eugenics. “Eugenics has been variously defined as a wedding of biology and politics with the proclaimed intention of saving the human species” (Goodman, 2002)

Why it is an issue Eugenics and forced sterilization are anthropologically important because they generally marginalize minority cultures and impede on the reproductive rights of the people. “The impact of modern science on government will make the problem of protecting individual rights and individual privacy all the more imperative in the years to come” (Goodman, 2002). The most famous and frightening examples of eugenics are genocide, like the concentration camps of WWII and mass murders of Native Americans. Unfortunately, eugenics has been happening all over the globe to wipe out choice minorities and promote the powerful; the downside is that “the group of humans worthy of redemption, however, remains ambiguously defined” (Goodman, 2002).

Although many experts feel that forced sterilization is benefiting to certain groups of people because it releases the “burden” of raising an unwanted child, the “experts” who decide are may not be making scientifically sound decisions as they think they are, but rather making their decision through culturally pre-conceived notions. For example, many causes of deafness and blindness are not genetically related, and thus these people may be quite capable of raising healthy children, even though in the US deaf and blind people were routinely coerced into sterilization in the recent past (Goodman, 2002). Even if deafness, for example, was completely genetic, who is to say a deaf person is having a negative impact to the human species? Refer to the following examples to see the variety and breadth the cultural marginalization of eugenics and forced sterilization has had.

US- . The first proposed forced sterilization bill in 1905 was called “An Act for the Prevention of Idiocy” (Goodman, 2002). Currently, 27 US states have laws permitting involuntary or ultimatum sterilizations, and 21 of these states have laws specifically for institutionalized or developmentally delayed patients (Goodman, 2002). These laws were passed in the early 1900's when the eugenics movement was gaining momentum, and have been around ever since. Margaret Sanger, the famed spokeswoman for birth control in the US and founder of Planned Parenthood was in support of eugenics and forced sterilization as a method of strengthening the American people (Goodman, 2002). Sanger is quoted in 1925 saying that “modern studies have indicated that insanity, epilepsy, criminality, prostitution, pauperism, and mental defect…in every community are the most [reproductively] prolific. Feeble-mindedness in one generation becomes pauperism or insanity in the next…unless the feeble-minded are prevented from reproducing their own kind. To meet this emergency is the immediate duty of every state…” (Ordover, 2002).

The beliefs about eugenics and forced sterilization that were strong in the first half of the 1900's died out as the horrors of the Nazi regime were exposed, as well as when accurate scientific research about genetics was discovered. For example, it was discovered that white children had a 90% higher chance to have Down's Syndrome than minorities, possibly because the risk of Down's Syndrome increases with age and white women have children later then non-whites; and that white people carry more genetic diseases than non-whites, possibly due to past inbreeding (Goodman, 2002).

China- In China, men and/or women are forced to be sterilized after their first child. The “one child law” was started in 1979 and in response to over-population and lack of resources to support exponential population growth. “Fines, pressures to abort a pregnancy, and even forced sterilization accompanied second or subsequent pregnancies” China's governmental implantation of one child for every couple had a rocky start because prior to this it was seen as patriotic to have many children. “For many generations, a large and fast-growing population was regarded as an indisputable measure of national power” (Barratt, 1972). The Chinese government, like that of a few other Asian countries, had to take political measures to change the message about population from national power to economic calamity and social responsibly by means of mass media campaigns, education, and neighborhood meetings (Clinton, Flash, Goodwin, 1972).

Dateline said in a 1999 article released said the one child rule “…is not an all-encompassing rule because it has always been restricted to ethnic Han Chinese living in urban areas. Citizens living in rural areas and minorities are not subject to the law”. However, the rule has been estimated to have reduced population growth in the country of 1.25 billion by as much as 300 million people over the past twenty years. Nonetheless, the one child law it is still coerced and governmentally implemented for “the good of all”, for the potential betterment of the Chinese, and often if a woman birthed a girl it was killed, neglected, aborted, or abandoned so the only child of a family would be a boy (www.geography.about.com, 1999). Now that these only children are coming to age, a new paradigm is playing out. An MPR radio show said that women have many men (the number of men is thought to outnumber women in China by more than 60 million) to pick from for husbands, even those that are above their social class. As a result, middle and low class men are often partner less, which is disappointing to their families.

Latin America- Beginning in the late 1970's and continuing on through today, US drug companies were killing two birds with one stone by testing their experimental contraceptive drugs on thousands of minority women in the Latin America, as well as promoting population control in foreign countries Donald Kennedy, the 1979 commissioner to the FDA, supported the use of the experimental contraceptive Depo-Provera in Latin American countries because, “quite obviously, a drug that may not be suitable for approval here could well have a favorable health/risk benefit in a less developed nation”(Ordover, 2003). Incidentally, the FDA did not give Depo-Provera approval for safety and effectiveness for use of US citizens until the early 1990's while it was minority women in Latin America as their guinea pigs (Ordover, 2003).

The US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare supported mass sterilization of poor Puerto Rican women after President Hoover announced that there were “174,650 children too many in Puerto Rico”. By 1976, 40% of all women of childbearing age were sterilized after they had three children, if they did not have a husband or if they were exceptionally poor. Most of these sterilizations were secret or coerced, occurring at time when they were vulnerable. Women were given caesarian sections so doctors could sterilize them more easily, other women would not be able to have their newborns back unless they agreed to sterilization. In the 1950's, drug companies tested early forms of birth control and progesterone on Puerto Rican women, even though in the states experimental drugs were only approved to be tested on the insane and drug addicts (Ordover, 2003).

Adoption

Definition- Adoption is when someone takes up and raises a child as their own that has been biologically born to a different mother. In the US, there are two types of adoption, open adoptions where the medical and legal files are public and the adoptive parents as well as the child have access to contact with the birth parents, and closed adoptions, when the records are sealed and the children have difficulty finding out who their biological parents are. Closed adoptions were done more in the past, but since the 1970's more open adoptions have taken place (Mary Jane, 2005). International adoptions to the US and within their own countries usually involve an orphanage or adoption agency, so there is little record of the birth parent or even the child up for adoption.

Why it is an issue. The circumstances surrounding adoption are often attributed to family values of an individual or culture.  In the example about Russia below, we see that adoption is taking place at high rates because of personal feelings about what makes up a family.  Putting a child up for adoption does not mean that the mother does not care about the welfare of her child.  In fact many adoptions in the US are regarded as an anti-abortion option, that is a mother will choose to carry a child to term and then put it up for adoption. 

The traditional American family has long been defined as a married man and woman with a couple of children and maybe a dog or a cat. Others say that's too rigid a definition. They say a family can consist of any number of combinations: same-sex couples with children, unmarried couples with children, couples with stepchildren, single parents and children.  An issue at the forefront of adoption is involved in the fight for gay marriage and civil unions.  Whether or not a person who is gay, lesbian or transgender is allowed to adopt depends on the laws of the state where she or he lives, policies of the agency or attorney and other factors. Such adoptions are at the center of much controversy, because some people feel that same-sex couple are not “true” couples and do not deserve the right to raise children.  In other countries, same-sex couples may have marriage rights but limited rights to adopt.  US and Europe same-sex adoption policies are outlined below.   

US-  2% of unmarried women in the US at any age place their child for adoption. (www.childtrends.org, 1995).  The percentage of premarital births placed for adoption has decreased since the 1970s. Analyses of three cycles of the National Survey of Family Growth show the following trend: From 1952 to 1972, 8.7% of all premarital births were placed for adoption.   Many adoptions are quite costly, especially if they do not happen through the foster care system (Langdon-Larson, 2005).  “Adoptions from foster homes you can get paid/a stipend to help you out with the kids- especially if they have psychological issues. Like a tax break. Private adoptions are more expensive, you get involved with an agency and it can cost you between fifteen and thirty thousand dollars. Once you've paid and you get your kids, that's it- there's no financial help after that. “ (Mary Jane, 2005).

            The laws are state by state concerning same-sex adoptions. Florida, New Hampshire Arkansas, Missouri, North Dakota and Virginia have legal precedence in which courts ruled that gays and lesbians are automatically unfit as parents. California, Minnesota, New York and New Jersey have laws or regulations which specifically permit homosexual adoption The remaining 40 states and the District of Columbia have no laws either forbidding or permitting adoption by gays or lesbians individuals or couples, and many of them are attempting to make it illegal.  Mississippi Governor Ronnie Musgrove signed a bill into law that bans homosexual couples from legally adopting children This decision overturned an earlier ruling by the state Superior Court in the year 2000 Same-sex couples have also been allowed to adopt in Oregon. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court unanimously decided that the existing state law was "absurd." It allowed a same-sex couple to legally adopt an unrelated child, put prevented a homosexual from adopting his/her partner's child. In a 1985 Alaska case, Adoption of a Minor Child, a minor child's lawyer recommended that a lesbian couple be allowed to adopt a child they had both parented since birth. The adoption was allowed because the court determined the mother's lesbian relationship was not a factor in whether she would be a good parent (Associated Press, 2002).

Europe-According to an Associated Press article, as of 2002-NOV-1, four European countries allowed gay and lesbian couples to adopt children: Denmark, Iceland, the Netherlands allow co-parent adoptions are not permitted to les/gay couples. In Sweden an enabling bill was passed in 2002-JUN and will come into effect on 2003-FEB-1.

Russia- Russia is hot-spot for adoption, but for adopting children out to other countries rather than Russians taking in adoptive children.  What men think as a family, as well as unwanted children “There are few problems with women as single mothers- however Russian men have qualms about raising another man's children. Consequently, women with children have a hard time getting married. This belief causes adoption to be a rare practice. They are more likely to adopt their children out than take in other children” (Linn, personal contact).     

Conclusion

Where are the Anthropologists?  Anthropologists could help with finding a standard by researching and comparing global policies/ethics.  Many of the issues represented here lend themselves to further research that anthropologists could be instrumental in making sense of.  In our research , we came across several non-profit organizations have worked hard at reaching these isolated groups. One such example of organizations in Mexico is Planned Parenthood Federation of America-International, which has several affiliates based in Mexico. The Mexican Family Planning Association (www.mexfam.org) clinics also provide Pap tests, contraception, and teen education programs. FEMAP, The Mexican Federation of Private Health and Community Development Associations works with 44 affiliate members throughout Mexico to improve the quality of life of people living in the poorest urban and rural areas (www.ppfa.org).

The above topics and country specific examples are just a few of the many cases of how reproductive control is happening throughout the world. Population control engages more human rights than just the single “right to reproduce”, including the rights to medical safety, protection of health, rights for the potential child, right to truthful and correct information. Above all, the nation's socio-political state and the cultural beliefs and morals of the people targeted for population and reproductive control are the main success factors.  The anthropological implications of population control are rich and revolve around the broad socio-political and cultural workings of a nation, through the smaller social groups and classes, all the way down to the person-person interactions and communications whether it be at a clinic or in the home.

                             Our Human Rights and Reproduction

Researchers:

Theresa Larson

Celia Rupp

David Rufledt

Kristen Venzke

Organization and Sponsor

University of Minnesota-Duluth

Anthropology Department

Linda Belote