SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
In the heat of a late September day in Mozambique, southern Africa, we started filming a meeting of young charity volunteers. They had poured heart and soul into an ambitious project aimed at combating HIV and spreading a message about contraception in the province of Gaza.
Then, out of the blue, and as our cameras rolled, came an unexpected announcement: the volunteers' work was to end because of a new policy from the United States.
Under US President Donald Trump's "Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance" policy, any foreign aid organisation that wants US funds cannot "perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in foreign countries".
Sebastiao Muthisse from AMODEFA, the Mozambican Association for Family Development, outlined the dilemma the aid organisation faced. They were not prepared to sign Trump's so-called 'global gag rule 'forbidding mention of abortion, and, as a result, projects had to close. For the youngsters it appeared to make no sense. Surely lack of advice on family planning would lead to unwanted pregnancies? Why should they be censored when it came to speaking about abortion?
AMODEFA, a member association of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, has worked in Mozambique since 1989. Now, the stance both organisations have taken on the Trump rule means they face losing millions of dollars in US aid, and for AMODEFA in Mozambique two-thirds of their total budget, a sum of $2m.
It's led to hard decisions, particularly when it comes to critical work on HIV prevention.
In a suburb of the capital Maputo, we met Palmira Tembe. Members of Palmira's family have died; five grandchildren are now dependent on her, along with her 13 year-old-son Nelson.
AMODEFA has received funds to help people like Palmira disclose to their families that they have HIV, and to support their care. Palmira told us that prior to the charity's involvement she couldn't tell her son Nelson why he was sick. Now both take HIV medicine together.
We will have generations that are sick without knowing what they have – they will run the risk of transmitting HIV to other people because they do not know their HIV status. In a country where it's estimated that up to 13 percent of people aged between 15 and 49 live with HIV, the support of organisations like AMODEFA can be a lifeline. But the work AMODEFA does with families like Palmira's is under threat, due to their refusal to sign up to the Trump policy.
Project leader Dr Marcelo Kantu is concerned about the future. "We will have generations that are sick without knowing what they have - they will run the risk of transmitting HIV to other people because they do not know their HIV status," he told us.
Visiting those supported by charity work in Mozambique, there was a recurring question: With the heavy price organisations could pay for defying the new US policy, why not forget about the abortion issue, sign up to the Trump rule, and keep American aid money?
Activists and charity workers told us it was not only about upholding a principle of choice, it was about free speech and a law introduced in Mozambique to save lives.
Mozambique liberalised its law on abortion in 2014, not least due to the high numbers of maternal deaths from illegal terminations. Since then, abortion is a legal option up until 12 weeks of pregnancy, and in cases of rape or incest during the first 16 weeks.
But there is Mozambique's new law on the one hand, and the Trump policy on the other.
It has long been understood that aid donations are sometimes an integral part of foreign policy; aid can be given in the hope that the recipient will favour the donor further along the line, perhaps with trade agreements or regional political support.
But is this a case of the donor wanting to influence a law that has been passed by a democratically elected government? Should aid be used as a way of dictating 'democracy' to follow the donor's views rather than allowing each democratic nation to evolve into the nation that its own citizens want?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Gaaark on Sunday December 10 2017, @07:47AM (2 children)
"You're very concisely ignoring the entire stance of the Other Side."
No, I'm not. I'm saying that if they think it is a child and should not be aborted and will tell you you CANNOT abort it, THEY should be responsible for it.
They think the child is worth having, but NOOO, they won't raise it: you who don't want it or cannot afford it has to raise it because the morally constipated say so. Nyah!
If a woman is repeatedly raped, should she be forced to raise a child she doesn't want because it will represent the attack and attacker for the rest of her life? Are you really that fucked?
You want her to keep it? You fucking raise it and pay for it.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Sunday December 10 2017, @09:30AM (1 child)
What is your stance on men who don't want to pay child support?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 10 2017, @11:14AM
If those men didn't have a child with a partner I'm totally in favour of their stance. If they did, the mother made a bad choice. You shouldn't have a child until you've fully domesticated you primary earner, after that they'll do literally anything for you. After than you may choose the have a child by any one who meets your selection criteria. It seems that men who have been domesticated really don't like it when men who haven't behave accordingly.