Your search found 2 Results
The blurred line between aiding progress and sanctioning abuse: United States appropriations, the UNFPA and family planning in the P.R.C.
New York Law School Journal of Human Rights. 2000; 17(3):1063-1104.This note discusses the trend in People's Republic of China programs, international standards of human rights, legislative trends, and the United States budget for fiscal years 2000 and 2001 as they apply to family planning programs. Specifically, this discussion shows why Congress should condition funding of these programs based on assurances of compliance with human rights standards. Part I presents an overview of the P.R.C. programs. Part II reviews internationally accepted standards of human rights concerning reproduction and population control, as well as China's violations of these rights. Part III describes UNFPA funding of the P.R.C.'s programs, emphasizing their latest 4-year program. Part IV discusses the legislative trend since 1985 of limiting or halting funding to the programs, and the current state of the federal budget regarding these appropriations. Part V discusses the global gag rule and the necessity of its removal. Part VI considers recently proposed legislation regarding funding family planning. Finally, the conclusion proposes a possible solution to the family planning dilemma in the face of both the continuing need for assistance and the continued existence of human rights abuses. (excerpt)
[Unpublished] 1992 Apr 2. iv, 37,  p. (PN-ABL-448)The family planning (FP) program sponsored by the National Family Planning Board (NFPB) of Jamaica has proved a successful example to other countries in the Caribbean. New challenges, however, face the Board and the Jamaican government. Specifically, the government wishes to realize replacement fertility by the year 2000; USAID/Kingston will phase out assistance for FP over the period 1993-98, while the UNFPA and the World Bank will also reduce support; the high use of supply methods such as the pill and condom is less efficient than the use of longterm methods; and legal, economic, regulatory, and other operational barriers exist that constrain FP program expansion. A new implementation strategy is therefore needed to address these problems. The NFPB is the best suited body to develop and implement this strategy. Accordingly, it should work to garner the support of and a partnership with the public and private sectors to mobilize resources for FP. Instead of being the primary provider of FP for all consumers, the public sector must start providing for users who cannot pay for services and leave those who can pay to the private sector. This approach will diversify the burden of financing services while expanding the pool of service providers. Recommendations and next steps for the NFPB are offered in the areas of population targets to be served; the role and function of the NFPB to reach and serve various targets; and how to sustain beyond the cessation of donor inputs.