The paternal rights and abortion issue is an extension of both the abortion debate and the fathers' rights movement. Abortion is becoming a factor for disagreement and lawsuit between partners.
History
Roman law allowed induced abortions but regulated it in consideration of the biological father. EmperorSeptimius Severus ruled circa 211 AD that a woman who had an abortion without consent from her husband should face exile for having bereaved her husband of children.
In his speechPro Cluentio, delivered in 66 BC, Cicero refers to a case he had heard of in which a woman from Miletus was sentenced to death for having aborted her pregnancy, upon receiving bribes from those who stood to inherit her husband's estate
if he produced no heir. Cicero said that in doing so she had "destroyed
the hope of the father, the memory of his name, the supply of his race,
the heir of his family, a citizen intended for the use of the
republic".
A 4th century BC Greek writer from Alexandria, Egypt, Sopater, quoted the lawyer Lysias, who had referred to a trial in Athens in which a man named Antigene accused his wife of having deprived him of a son by having an abortion.
Men and abortion in law
Whether a male has a legal right to advance his personal interest, whether it be toward abortion, fatherhood, or adoption, over that of the female, differs by region.
In China the husband of a woman who had an abortion filed a lawsuit against her in 2002 under a law intended to grant sexual equality in terms of childbearing and contraceptive decisions. The law stated that a woman has no overriding priority over her spouse in deciding whether to have a child.
A number of legal cases
have arisen in the Western world in which men have tried to prevent
women with whom they had been sexually active from obtaining an
abortion, all of which failed:
1978: William Paton of Liverpool, United Kingdom attempted to stop his separated wife, Joan, from undergoing an abortion in the 1978 case Paton v. Trustees of British Pregnancy Advisory Service Trustees. A judge ruled in his wife's favour and Mr. Paton's later request for a hearing before the European Court of Human Rights was also denied.
1987: Robert Carver of the United Kingdom tried to prevent an abortion in the 1987 case C v. S.
He claimed that the Infant Life (Preservation) Act applied to the
fetus, as, at the time, his ex-girlfriend was 21 weeks along. When the High Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal dismissed the case, it was brought before the House of Lords, where three Law Lords
sided with the earlier decisions. The entire legal process took 36
hours, as the Health Authority refused to allow an abortion before a
decision was reached, making it one of the fastest cases in the history
of British law. Nonetheless, the woman involved chose to carry the pregnancy to term and gave the baby to Carver.
2006: Matt Dubay child support case was a legal case between Matt Dubay and his ex-girlfriend, both of Saginaw Township, Michigan.
Dubay claimed in court documents that he informed his ex-girlfriend he
had no interest in becoming a father. Dubay also claimed in court
documents that in response, she said she was infertile and that, as an
extra layer of protection, she was using contraception. The case was dubbed "Roe v. Wade for Men" by the National Center for Men. Dubay's lawsuit was dismissed by the judge.
2006: In Uruguay, a man promoted a protection against the legal abortion of his wife. The judge Pura Book prohibited that abortion.
Controversy
Those
who support a man's right to intervene in a woman's reproductive
decisions, argue that it is unreasonable that, after fertilisation has
occurred, women are often given more options with regard to pregnancy and parenthood than men.
Armin Brott has said of this, "A woman can legally deprive a man of his
right to become a parent or force him to become one against his will".
Abortion vetoing
Men's rights and fathers' rights activists have argued that men should have veto power over their partners' decisions to abort.
Similarly, philosopher George W. Harris has written that, if a man
impregnates a woman with the explicit goal of having a child, in a
manner that is mutually consensual, then it would be morally
unacceptable for that woman to later have an abortion.
Those who object to men having a right to direct involvement
argue that because it is the woman's body carrying the unborn baby, her
determination for or against abortion should be the only one. Marsha Garrison, a professor at Brooklyn Law School,
stated that U.S. courts acknowledge "that embryo is in the woman's
body, it is within her and can't be separated from her, so it's not just
her decision-making about whether to bear a child, it's about her
body".
Abortion notification
A 2002 United States Gallup special report mentions only 38% of the population being opposed to notifying the husband of a married woman for an abortion. In a 2003 Gallup poll,
72% of respondents were in favor of notification to the husband, with
26% opposed; of those polled, 79% of males and 67% of females responded
in favor of notification inside married couples.
Pregnancy vetoing
Bioethicist
Jacob Appel has asked, “if one grants a man veto power over a woman’s
choice to have an abortion in cases where he is willing to pay for the
child, why not grant him the right to demand an abortion where he is
unwilling to provide for the child?"
Opting out
In reference to cases in which men who do not desire to become fathers have been required to pay child support,
Melanie McCulley, a South Carolina attorney, in her 1998 article, "The
Male Abortion: The Putative Father's Right to Terminate His Interests in
and Obligations to the Unborn Child," set forth the theory of the "male
abortion," in which she argues that men should be able to terminate
their legal obligations to unwanted children.
Opting in
It is
also possible, rather than taking the stance that males should have the
freedom to opt out of inherent responsibilities and rights, to take the
stance that one must opt-in and agree to undertake those
responsibilities to be compelled to follow them, and only through doing
so, earn parental rights. This is what occurs during adoption.
The men's movement is a social movement consisting of groups and organizations of men and their allies who focus on gender issues and whose activities range from self-help and support to lobbying and activism.
The men's movement consisted of "networks of men self-consciously
involved in activities relating to men and gender. It emerged in the
late 1960s and 1970s in Western Culture, alongside and often in response
to the women's movement and feminism."
Whilst bearing many of the hallmarks of therapeutic, self-help groups,
men's movement groupings have increasingly come to view personal growth
and better relations with other men as "useless without an accompanying
shift in the social relations and ideologies that support or marginalise
different ways of being men".
Men's movement activists who are sympathetic to feminist standpoints
have been greatly concerned with deconstructing male identity and masculinity. Taking a cue from early feminists who criticized the traditional female gender role,
members of the men's liberation movement used the language of sex role
theory to argue that the male gender role was similarly restrictive and
damaging to men.
Some men's liberationists decontextualized gender relations and argued
that since sex roles were equally harmful to both sexes women and men
were equally oppressed.
[M]en's
liberation had disappeared. The conservative and moderate wings of
men's liberation became an anti-feminist men's rights movement,
facilitated by the language of sex roles. The progressive wing of men's
liberation abandoned sex role language and formed a profeminist movement
premised on a language of gender relations and power.
Pro-feminist men's movements
The profeminist men's movement emerged from the men's liberation movement in the mid 1970s.
The first Men and Masculinity Conference, held in Tennessee in 1975,
was one of the first organized activities by profeminist men in the
United States. The profeminist men's movement was influenced by second-wave feminism, the Black Power and student activism movement, the anti-war movement, and LGBT social movements of the 1960s and 1970s. It is the strand of the men's movement that generally embraces the egalitarian goals of feminism.
Profeminist men have questioned the cultural ideal of traditional masculinity. They often argue that social expectations and norms
have forced men into rigid gender roles, limited men's ability to
express themselves, and restricted their choices to behaviors regarded
as socially acceptable for men. Moreover, profeminist men have sought to disestablish sexism and reduce discrimination against women. They have campaigned alongside feminists on a variety of issues, including the Equal Rights Amendment, reproductive rights, laws against employment discrimination, affordable child care, and to end sexual violence against women.
In more recent decades following the beginning of the profeminist
men's movement in the United States, similar and interconnected
initiatives have been organized internationally.
In 2004, a number of leaders involved with engaging men and boys in
gender justice around the world came together to form the global
organization MenEngage. Since then MenEngage has organized two international conferences; one in Rio de Janeiro in 2009 and another in New Delhi in 2014.
The men's rights movement branched off from the men's liberation movement in the mid- to late 1970s. It focused specifically on issues of perceived discrimination and inequalities faced by men. The MRM has been involved in a variety of issues related to law (including family law, parenting, reproduction and domestic violence), government services (including education, military service and social safety nets) health.
The fathers' rights movement is a subset of the men's rights movement. Its members are primarily interested in issues related to family law, including child custody and child support that affect fathers and their children.
The mythopoetic men's movement is based on spiritual perspectives derived from psychoanalysis, and especially the work of Carl Jung. It is less political than either the profeminist or men's rights movement and has a self-help focus. It is called "mythopoetic" because of the emphasis on mythology communicated as poetry with some appropriation of indigenous, e.g. Native American, mythology and knowledge. Robert Bly,
a leading mythopoetic, has criticized "soft men" and argued that boys
must be initiated into manhood in order to possess "Zeus energy", which
according to Bly is "male authority" that "encompasses intelligence,
robust health, compassionate decisiveness, good will, generous
leadership".
Mythopoetic men emphasize "elder honouring", "reclaiming" fathers, and
"unleashing the wild man within", but with an emphasis on the impact of
fatherlessness on men's psychological development.
Sociologists Michael Messner and Michael Flood
have argued separately that the term "movement" is problematic as,
unlike other social movements, the men's movement has mostly been
focused on self-improvement, is internally contradictory, and consists
of members of what they argue is a privileged group.
Violence against men (VAM), consists of violent acts that are disproportionately or exclusively committed against men. Men are overrepresented as both victims and perpetrators of violence. Sexual violence against men is treated differently in any given society from that committed against women, and may be unrecognized by international law.
Perceptions
Studies
of social attitudes show violence is perceived as more or less serious
depending on the gender of victim and perpetrator. According to a study in the publication Aggressive Behavior,
violence against women was about a third more likely to be reported by
third parties to the police regardless of the gender of the attacker, although the most likely to be reported gender combination was a male perpetrator and female victim. The use of stereotypes by law enforcement is a recognised issue,
and international law scholar Solange Mouthaan argues that, in conflict
scenarios, sexual violence against men has been ignored in favor of a
focus on sexual violence against women and children.
One explanation for this difference in focus is the physical power that
men hold over women making people more likely to condemn violence with
this gender configuration. The concept of male survivors of violence go against social perceptions of the male gender role, leading to low recognition and few legal provisions. Often there is no legal framework for a woman to be prosecuted when committing violent offenses against a man.
Richard Felson
challenges the assumption that violence against women is different from
violence against men. The same motives play a role in almost all
violence, regardless of gender: to gain control or retribution and to
promote or defend self-image.
Writing for Time, Cathy Young
criticised the feminist movement for not doing enough to challenge
double standards in the treatment of male victims of physical abuse and
sexual assault.
Domestic violence
In 2013 editor-in-chief of the journal Partner Abuse, John Hamel, set up the Domestic Violence Research Group to create the "Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project (PASK)". PASK found parity in rates of both perpetration and victimisation for men and women.
Men who are victims of domestic violence
are at times reluctant to report it or to seek help. According to some
commentators there is also a paradigm that only males perpetrate
domestic violence and are never victims. Shamita Das Dasgupta and Erin Pizzey are amongst those who argue that, as with other forms of violence against men, intimate partner violence is generally less recognized in society when the victims are men. Violence of women against men in relationships is often 'trivialized' due to the supposed weaker physique of women; in such cases the use of dangerous objects and weapons is omitted.
Research since the 1990s has identified issues of perceived and actual
bias when police are involved, with the male victim being negated even
whilst injured.
Female violence against men
According to the journalist Martin Daubney
"...there remains a theory that men under report their experiences [of
violence by women against men] due to a culture of masculine
expectations." The official figure in the United Kingdom,
for example, is about 50% of the number of acts of violence by men
against women, but there are indications that only about 10% of male
victims of female violence report the incidents to the authorities,
mainly due to taboos and fears of misunderstanding created by a culture
of masculine expectations. By comparison 1.9 million people aged 16–59 told the Crime Survey for England and Wales
(year ending March 2017), that they were victims of domestic violence
and 79% did not report their partner or ex-partner. Of the 1.9 million,
approximately 1.2 million were female and 713,000 were male.
A Canadian report found that men were 22% more likely to report being
victims of spousal violence in their current relationship than women. Researchers Stemple and Meyer report that sexual violence by women against men is often understudied or unrecognized.
Family violence scholar Richard Gelles
published an article entitled "Domestic Violence: Not An Even Playing
Field" and accused men's rights groups of distorting research findings
on men's and women's violence to promote a misogynistic agenda.
Some domestic violence scholars and advocates have rejected the
research cited by men's rights activists and dispute their claims that
such violence is gender symmetrical,
arguing that their focus on violence against men stems from a political
agenda to minimize the severity of the problem of men's violence
against women and children and to undermine services to abused women.
Forced circumcision
Non-therapeutic male circumcision is considered, by several groups, to be a form of violence against young men and boys. The International Criminal Court considers forced circumcision to be an "inhumane act". Some court decisions have found it to be a violation of a child's rights. In certain countries, such as Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, Indonesia, Pakistan, the Philippines, South Korea, Turkey and the United States, newborn baby males are routinely circumcised without the child's consent. As well, the Jewish and Muslim faiths circumcise boys at a young age. It is also practiced in Coptic Christianity and the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.
Although a 2012 court ruling in Germany put the practice of male
cutting under question, calling circumcision "grievous bodily harm," the
German parliament passed a law to keep circumcision of boys legal. As of 2016, cutting of boys' foreskins is still legal worldwide.
Mass killings
Serbian victims during insurgency in the Kosovo War
In situations of structural violence that include war and genocide, men and boys are frequently singled out and killed. The murder of targets by sex during the Kosovo War, estimates of civilian male victims of mass killings suggest that they made up more than 90% of all civilian casualties.
Non-combatant men and boys have been and continue to be the most
frequent targets of mass killing and genocidal slaughter, as well as a
host of lesser atrocities and abuses. Gendercide Watch, an independent human rights group, documents multiple gendercides aimed at males (adult and children): The Anfal Campaign,
(Iraqi Kurdistan), 1988 – Armenian Genocide (1915–17) – Rwanda, 1994. Forced conscription can also be considered gender-based violence against men.
Sexual violence
In armed conflict, sexual violence is committed by men against men as psychological warfare in order to demoralize the enemy. The practice is ancient, and was recorded as taking place during the Crusades.
Castration is used as a means of physical torture with strong
psychological effects, namely the loss of the ability to procreate and
the loss of the status of a full man. International criminal law does not consider gender based sexual violence against men a separate type of offense and treats it as war crimes or torture. The culture of silence around this issue often leaves men with no support.
In 2012, a UNHCR report stated that "SGBV (sexual and gender
based violence) against men and boys has generally been mentioned as a
footnote in reports".
In one study, less than 3% of organizations that address rape as a
weapon of war, mention men or provide services to male victims. It was noted in 1990 that the English language is "bereft of terms and phrases which accurately describe male rape".
In the U.S., crime statistics from the 1976 onwards show that men make up the majority of the homicide
perpetrators regardless if the victim is female or male. Men are also
over-represented as victims in homicide involving both male and female
offenders. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, women who kill men are most likely to kill acquaintances, spouses or boyfriends while men are more likely to kill strangers. In many cases, women kill men due to being victims of intimate partner violence, however this research was conducted on women on death row, a sample size of approximately 97 during the last 100 years.
Pringle-Patric House, one of the first women's domestic violence shelters in the United States, built in 1877
A women's shelter, also known as a women's refuge and battered women's shelter, is a place of temporary protection and support for women escaping domestic violence and intimate partner violence of all forms. The term is also frequently used to describe a location for the same purpose that is open to people of both genders at risk.
Representative data samples done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that one in three women will experience physical violence during their lifetime. One in ten will experience sexual violence.
Women's shelters help individuals escape these instances of domestic
violence and intimate partner violence and act as a place for protection
as they choose how to move forward. Additionally, many shelters offer a
variety of other services to help women and their children including counseling and legal guidance.
The ability to escape is valuable for women subjected to domestic
violence or intimate partner violence. Additionally, such situations
frequently involve an imbalance of power that limits the victim's
financial options when they want to leave. Shelters help women gain tangible resources to help them and their families create a new life. Lastly, shelters are valuable to battered women because they can help them find a sense of empowerment.
Women's shelters are available in more than forty-five countries.
They are supported with government resources as well as non-profit
funds. Additionally, many philanthropists also help and support these
institutions.
History
Asia
For Asia, offering shelter to abused women is not a new concept. In feudal Japan, Buddhist temples known as Kakekomi Dera acted as locations where abused women could take shelter before filing for divorce.
A formal system took more time, however, so it was not until 1993 that
the grassroots women's movement of Japan built the first shelter. Today, there are thirty shelters throughout the country. A similar history did not lead to as much progress in China. Women's shelters did not exist until the nineties and since then the country only opened a small number. In Beijing there are no shelters for the twenty million residents.
Canada
The very
first women's shelter in Canada was started in 1965 by the Harbour
Rescue Mission (now Mission Services) in Hamilton, Ontario. It was named
Inasmuch House, with the name referencing a Bible verse (Matthew 25:40)
quoting Jesus Christ as saying "Inasmuch as you have done it for the
least of these, you have done it for me." It was designed to be a
practical outworking of Christian values relating to justice and care.
Although originally conceived as a shelter for women leaving prison, its
clientele later became women escaping abuse by their partners.
The concept of Inasmuch House was shared with other Christian
inner-city missions across North America and led to the opening of
other such shelters.
The first shelters in Canada developed from a feminist
perspective were started by Interval House, Toronto in April 1973, and
the Ishtar Transition Housing Society in Langley, B.C.in June 1973. The
Edmonton Women's Shelter (later WIN House) -- a group from all walks of
life, and secular as well as Christian beliefs -- was opened in January
1970 to shelter any woman who needed shelter for any reason.
These homes were grassroots organizations that lived on short term
grants at first, with staff often working sacrificially in order to keep
the houses running to ensure women's safety.
From there, the movement in Canada grew, with women's shelters
opening under a variety of names - often as a Transition House or
Interval House - opening up across the country in order to help women
flee from abusive situations. The Alberta Council of Women's Shelters
was founded in 1983. ACWS became a founding member of Women's Shelters
Canada and also hosted the first ever world conference of women's
shelters in Edmonton in 2008. The conference included 800 delegates from
60 countries. The world conference is now a separate organisation with
a fourth world conference set to take place in Taipei in 2019.
In February 2019 ACWS hosted the first Western Canadian
violence-prevention conference, the 'Leading Change Summit: Bold
Conversations to end gender-based violence'
which included Dr. Michael Flood (QUB) and actor and activist Terry
Crews as well as 230 delegates from community organisations, trade
unions, government and corporates committed to ending domestic violence.
United States
The
first likely women's shelter in the United States, Emergency Shelter
Program Inc. (now Ruby's Place inc.), was established in Hayward,
California in 1972 by a local group of women who attended church
together. Betty Moose one of the founding members offically incorporated
the shelter in March of 1972. Shortly after they established a local
domestic violence hotline. Before the shelter was officially open
volunteers housed women in their own homes. Other locations soon popped up around the United States which include Rosie's Place in Boston, Massachusetts, which was opened in 1974 by Kip Tiernan, and the Atlanta Union Mission in Atlanta, opened by Elsie Huck.
Women's shelters evolved over time. Grassroots community
advocates in the 1970s offered shelters as one of the first services for
victims of intimate partner violence. At this time, most shelters were for emergencies and involved stays less than six months.
Volunteers and shelter workers offered legal and welfare referrals to
women when they exited but contact afterwards was limited. More recent
programs, such as those funded by the Violence Against Women Act, offer longer term stays for women. These locations, as well as transitional housing, offer more services to women and their children.
Another recent change is the increasing amount of shelters publicizing
their locations to increase funding and visibility in the community.
Due to the growing women's movement, the number of shelters
quickly increased after their induction and by 1977 the United States
had eighty-nine shelters available for victims of violence. By 2000, the United States had over 2,000 domestic violence programs in place, many with domestic violence shelters included.
Europe
In England, Erin Pizzey opened the first widely known shelter for battered women, Chiswick Women's Aid in 1971. Since this time almost every European country has opened shelters to help domestic violence victims. Two countries even offer shelters for particular ethnicities and cultures.
Additionally, a new development in Europe is that countries like the
Netherlands and Austria opened social housing for long term stays. One reason for this growth is the Istanbul Convention against Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence, a convention signed by forty-seven Council of Europe member states in 2011. An article in the Convention sets the creation of women's shelters as a minimum standard for compliance. Following austerity two thirds of local authorities in England have cut funding for women's refuges since 2010.
Australia
In Australia, the first women's refuge, known as Elsie Refuge, was opened in Glebe, New South Wales
in 1974 by a group of women's liberation activists. Many others
followed, with 11 established around the country by the middle of 1975
and many more to follow. Initially these services were entirely reliant
on volunteer efforts and donations from the community, but they
subsequently secured government funding under the Whitlam government.
However, government policy has recently seen some moves to dismantle
the women's refuge movement, so that in New South Wales since 2014 the
management of many refuges has been handed over to large religious
agencies so that they now often operate as generic homeless services
rather than specifically catering to women and children escaping
domestic violence.
Services
General purpose
Women's shelters offer temporary refuge for women escaping acts of domestic violence or intimate partner violence.
Many women become homeless in this situation because they are
financially dependent on their abuser and these resources help to
incentivize and support escape. The average length of stay for women is between thirty and sixty days in the United States. However, this varies in different countries and in Europe, for example, four countries limit stays to a few weeks. Transitional housing,
another form of women's shelter, offers stays of up to a year while
certain communities offer public and private housing for even longer
periods.
Utilization
There is high demand for shelter services in the United States. A one-day national census done by the National Network to End Domestic Violence
found that emergency shelters served over 66,581 people in one day and
over 9,000 requests could not be met during the same period. In Europe there is a similar pattern of over-demand.
Utilization by women is not consistent across the population of
intimate partner violence victims, however. Women with children tend to
use shelters more often as well as those that are injured physically. Additionally, rural women have more trouble accessing services due to isolation and a lack of resources.
Other services offered
Shelters are usually offered as part of a comprehensive domestic violence program that can also include a crisis hotline, services for non-sheltered children, an education program, a community speaker list, and an offender treatment program.
Shelters themselves also offer a variety of services. They provide
counseling, support groups and skills workshops to help women move on
independently.
These act as tools of empowerment for women in conjunction with goal
setting programs. Lastly, they offer support for children as well as
legal and medical advocacy.
Most residents of women's shelters are the children of women who
are victims of violence. This is one reason why more than half of
shelters offered services to this portion of the population in a survey
of 215 shelters in the United States.
Services for children often include counseling and group therapy
options that are meant to strengthen parent-child relationships and help
with mental well-being. Recently, shelters also responded to increasing numbers of male victims by offering help mostly in the form of hotel vouchers.
Male residents
In the United States, certain shelters do not permit access to men. This practice was challenged in Blumhorst v. Haven Hills, a court case in California (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC291977).
However, the court dismissed the case because the plaintiff lacked
standing – he was not involved in an abusive relationship and did not
need shelter. Certain groups are critical of the smaller amount of resources available to men in the United States and across the world.
However, other sources dispute the view that male-only refuges are
wanted or needed by most male victims, arguing that the issue has been
misrepresented out of misogyny rather than genuine concern for male
victims. The Istanbul Convention, for example, states that the creation of women's shelters is not discriminatory.
Some shelters do permit access today, including the Domestic Abuse Project (DAP) of Delaware County, which offers services to both sexes. According to their own reports, around three percent of DAP supported individuals have been men.
In the United Kingdom, 100 places were opened to house male victims of
domestic violence in Northamptonshire, or to house families barred from
other shelters, such as women with older male children. In Canada, approximately 8 percent of women's shelters are also open to adult men.
Funding
United States
Volunteers
in El Paso, Oct. 16, 2012, supporting a Walk a Mile in Her Shoes event
to raise funds for the YWCA's Independence House.
Women's shelters in the United States are supported at a state and national level. Over 50% of the funding offered at the state level, however, comes from the federal government through grants.
Services are generally administered through Domestic Violence
Intervention Programs (DVIPs) funded by the Family Violence Services
Act, the Victims of Crime Act of 1984, and the Violence Against Women Act. Various non-profits also contribute to the services offered and provide a national voice for the issue. Examples include the National Network to End Domestic Violence which represents fifty-six U.S. states and territories, the National Organization for Victim Assistance, and local United Ways.
Reports show that on any day over 5,000 women are unable to use services because of a lack of funding or space. Many states have also cut their funds for women's shelters. In 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger of California cut $16 million in state funding to domestic violence programs because of the state's budget deficit. In late 2011 Washington governor Christine Gregoire released a budget proposal stripping all state funding for domestic violence and women's shelters across Washington State.
These types of budget cuts caused several shelters to close their
doors, leaving women with no safe haven to escape Intimate partner
violence. Local communities are now also taking it upon themselves to
create a safe place for domestic violence refugees. In Grand Forks, British Columbia, a small community of less than 3,600, people organized the Boundary Women's Coalition, to support their local women's shelter.
Grant examples
Many grants help fund women's shelters in the United States.
Grant title
Source
Qualifications
Purpose
STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program
Office on Violence Against Women
Available to states and territories
Thirty percent of funds provided are to improve on services available to victims of intimate partner violence.
State and Territorial Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Coalitions Program
Office on Violence Against Women
Available for domestic violence coalitions
Funds provided to each state's domestic violence coalition to
improve the coordination of services available in each state. These
coalitions give funds directly to shelters.
Grants to Tribal Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Coalitions Program
Office on Violence Against Women
Available to tribal domestic violence coalitions.
Funds provided to support tribal domestic violence coalitions that offer services to under-served populations.
Family Violence Prevention and Services Discretionary Grants: National and Special Issue Resource Centers
Administration for Children and Families
Nonprofits with or without 501(c)(3) status; Native American tribal organizations
Funds provided to start individual National Resource Centers on Domestic Violence.
OVC FY 16 Vision 21: Enhancing Access and Attitudinal Changes in Domestic Violence Shelters for Individuals with Disabilities
Office for Victims of Crime
State and regional domestic violence coalitions
Funds provided to help shelters make facilities accessible to those with disabilities.
Effects
Women often suffer lasting mental conditions from their abuse including anxiety disorders, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorders (PTSD).
Since women in shelters have more likely experienced severe physical
and mental abuse than those who do not utilize these services, they are
also more likely to experience PTSD.
In fact, a national organizational survey compiled four separate
studies of female support group or shelter users and reported PTSD rates
between 45% and 84% (Astin, Lawrence, Pincus, & Foy, 1990; Houskamp
& Foy,1991; Roberts, 1996a; Saunders, 1994). These emotional and mental consequences have an effect on women's career opportunities and ability to function in normal life.
Women's shelters try to counteract these effects as well as prevent
future instances of abuse. However, PTSD can prohibit women from
utilizing shelter resources effectively.
Shelter utilization may lead to the better functioning of survivors and fewer reports of abuse in the short term.
Research that studied 3,410 residents of 215 domestic violence across
the United States linked longer shelter stays with increased well-being
and better help-seeking behaviors.
The latter is a result of increased knowledge about services and
options available to women in vulnerable positions as well as increased
empowerment. This may indicate that transition services and longer residential offerings are more valuable.
Criticism
Many
women report re-abuse after leaving a shelter. A sample study done by
Bybee and Sullivan, which analyzed data from 124 victims who utilized
shelters, found no positive effect on re-abuse three years after shelter
use.
Additionally, with current resource restraints in the United States,
standard shelters do not provide the PTSD or psychotherapeutic
treatments necessary for full support.
They also have issues with under-serving the community because of a
shortage of funded staff, a lack of bilingual staff, and inadequate
facilities.
Shelters in Europe are similarly limited and only eight countries
fulfill the minimum standards for shelters set by the Istanbul
Convention.
Another criticism of the shelters in Europe is that they have strict
age limits that keep male children out and certain shelters discriminate
against women from other countries or who identify as lesbian or
transgender.
The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), formerly the United Nations Fund for Population Activities, is a UN
organization. The UNFPA says it "is the lead UN agency for delivering a
world where every pregnancy is wanted, every childbirth is safe and
every young person's potential is fulfilled". Their work involves the improvement of reproductive health; including creation of national strategies and protocols, and birth control
by providing supplies and services. The organization has recently been
known for its worldwide campaign against child marriage, obstetric fistula and female genital mutilation.
The UNFPA supports programs in more than 150 countries and areas spread across four geographic regions: Arab States and Europe, Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, and sub-Saharan Africa. Around three quarters of the staff work in the field. It is a member of the United Nations Development Group and part of its executive committee.
Origins
UNFPA began operations in 1969 as the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (the name was changed in 1987) under the administration of the United Nations Development Fund. In 1971 it was placed under the authority of the United Nations General Assembly.
UNFPA and the Sustainable Development Goals
In September 2015, the 193 member states of the United Nations unanimously adopted the Sustainable Development Goals, a set of 17 goals aiming to transform the world over the next 15 years. These goals are designed to eliminate poverty, discrimination, abuse and preventable deaths, address environmental destruction, and usher in an era of development for all people, everywhere.
The Sustainable Development Goals are ambitious, and they will
require enormous efforts across countries, continents, industries and
disciplines, but they are achievable. UNFPA works with governments,
partners and other UN agencies to directly tackle many of these goals –
in particular Goal 3 on health, Goal 4 on education and Goal 5 on gender equality – and contributes in a variety of ways to achieving many of the other goals.
Leadership
Executive Directors and Under-Secretaries-General of the UN
UNFPA is the world's largest multilateral source of funding for population and reproductive health
programs. The Fund works with governments and non-governmental
organizations in over 150 countries with the support of the
international community, supporting programs that help women, men and
young people:
voluntarily plan and have the number of children they desire and to avoid unwanted pregnancies
UNFPA uses a human rights-based approach in programming to address three "transformative goals":
1. Zero preventable maternal death
2. Zero gender-based violence
3. Zero unmet need for family planning.
The Fund raises awareness of and supports efforts to meet these
goals, advocates close attention to population concerns and helps
nations formulate policies and strategies in support of sustainable development. Dr. Osotimehin assumed leadership in January 2011. The Fund is also represented by UNFPA Goodwill Ambassadors and a Patron.
How UNFPA Works
UNFPA
works in partnership with governments, along with other United Nations
agencies, communities, NGOs, foundations and the private sector, to
raise awareness and mobilize the support and resources needed to achieve
its mission to promote the rights and health of women and young people.
Contributions from governments and the private sector to UNFPA in
2016 totaled $848 million. The amount includes $353 million to the
organization's core resources and $495 million earmarked for specific
programs and initiatives.
Examples of campaigns:
Campaign to end fistula
This UNFPA-led global campaign works to prevent obstetric fistula,
a devastating and socially isolating injury of childbirth, to treat
women who live with the condition and help those who have been treated
to return to their communities. The campaign works in more than 40
countries in Africa, the Arab States and South Asia.
The leader of the campaign to end fistula, Erin Anastasi, decided to
start this campaign in 2003 in hopes of ending deaths of new mothers
after developing fistula. This campaign is now active in over 50
countries working not only to prevent fistula, but also to give fistula
survivors a sense of reforming their life after overcoming this burden.
Nearly 800 women in Africa and Asia die after childbirth and more than 2
million young women live with untreated obstetric fistula in Asia and
Sub-Saharan Africa. The campaign focuses mainly on providing training
and funds to support women living with fistula, and also programs aimed
towards survivors. The campaign is also looking at ways to prevent
fistula from developing in general by providing medical supplies and
technical guidance and support.
Ending female genital mutilation
UNFPA has worked for many years to end the practice of female genital mutilation,
the partial or total removal of external female genital organs for
cultural or other non-medical reasons. The practice, which affects
100–140 million women and girls across the world, violates their right
to health and bodily integrity. In 2007, UNFPA in partnership with UNICEF,
launched a $44-million program to reduce the practice by 40 per cent in
16 countries by 2015 and to end it within a generation. UNFPA also
recently sponsored a Global Technical Consultation, which drew experts from all over the world to discuss strategies to convince communities to abandon the practice. UNFPA supports the campaign to end female genital mutilation with The Guardian.
Relations with the US government
UNFPA has been accused by groups opposed to abortion of providing support for
government programs which have promoted forced-abortions and coercive
sterilizations.
UNFPA says it "does not provide support for abortion services". Its charter includes a strong statement condemning coercion.
Controversies regarding these claims have resulted in a sometimes shaky
relationship between the organization and three presidential
administrations, that of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and George W.
Bush, withholding funding from the UNFPA.
UNFPA provided aid to Peru's reproductive health program in the
mid-to-late 1990s. When it was discovered a Peruvian program had been
engaged in carrying out coercive sterilizations, UNFPA called for
reforms and protocols to protect the rights of women seeking assistance.
UNFPA continued work with the country after the abuses had become
public to help end the abuses and reform laws and practices.
From 2002 through 2008, the Bush Administration denied funding to
UNFPA that had already been allocated by the US Congress, on the
grounds that the UNFPA supported Chinese government programs which
include forced abortions and coercive sterilizations. In a letter from
the Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns to
Congress, the administration said it had determined that UNFPA's support
for China's population program “facilitates (its) government’s coercive
abortion program”, thus violating the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, which bans
the use of United States aid to finance organizations that support or
take part in managing a program of coercive abortion of sterilization.
The notion that UNFPA had any connection to China's
administration of forced abortions was deemed to be unsubstantiated by
investigations carried out by various US, UK, and UN teams sent to
examine UNFPA activities in China.
Specifically, a three-person U.S State Department fact-finding team
was sent on a two-week tour throughout China. It wrote in a report to
the State Department that it found "no evidence that UNFPA has supported
or participated in the management of a program of coercive abortion or
involuntary sterilization in China," as has been charged by critics.
However, according to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell,
the UNFPA contributed vehicles and computers to the Chinese to carry
out their population planning policies. However, both the Washington
Post and the Washington Times reported that Powell simply fell in line,
signing a brief written by someone else.
Rep. Chris Smith
(R-NJ), criticized the State Department investigation, saying the
investigators were shown "Potemkin Villages" where residents had been
intimidated into lying about the family-planning program. Dr. Nafis
Sadik, former director of UNFPA said her agency had been pivotal in
reversing China's coercive population planning methods, but a 2005
report by Amnesty International
and a separate report by the United States State Department found that
coercive techniques were still regularly employed by the Chinese,
casting doubt upon Sadik's statements.
But Amnesty International found no evidence that UNFPA had supported the coercion. A 2001 study conducted by the pro-life Population Research Institute
(PRI) claimed that the UNFPA shared an office with the Chinese family
planning officials who were carrying out forced abortions.
"We located the family planning offices, and in that family planning
office, we located the UNFPA office, and we confirmed from family
planning officials there that there is no distinction between what the
UNFPA does and what the Chinese Family Planning Office does," said Scott
Weinberg, a spokesman for PRI.
However, United Nations Members disagreed and approved UNFPA's new
country program me in January 2006. The more than 130 members of the
“Group of 77” developing countries in the United Nations expressed
support for the UNFPA programmes. In addition, speaking for European
democracies – Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands, France,
Belgium, Switzerland and Germany – the United Kingdom
stated, ”UNFPA’s activities in China, as in the rest of the world, are
in strict conformity with the unanimously adopted Programme of Action of
the ICPD, and play a key role in supporting our common endeavor, the
promotion and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
President Bush denied funding to the UNFPA.
Over the course of the Bush Administration, a total of $244 million in
Congressionally approved funding was blocked by the Executive Branch.
In response, the EU decided to fill the gap left behind by the US under the Sandbaek report. According to its Annual Report for 2008,
the UNFPA received its funding mainly from European Governments:
Of the total income of M845.3 M, $118 was donated by the Netherlands,
$67 M by Sweden, $62 M by Norway, $54 M by Denmark, $53 M by the UK, $52
M by Spain, $19 M by Luxembourg. The European Commission donated
further $36 M. The most important non-European donor State was Japan
($36 M). The number of donors exceeded 180 in one year.
In the United States, nonprofit organizations like Friends of UNFPA (formerly Americans for UNFPA) worked to compensate for the loss of United States federal funding by raising private donations.
In January 2009 President Barack Obama restored US funding to
UNFPA, saying in a public statement that he would "look forward to
working with Congress to restore US financial support for the UN
Population Fund. By resuming funding to UNFPA, the US will be joining
180 other donor nations working collaboratively to reduce poverty,
improve the health of women and children, prevent HIV/AIDS and provide
family planning assistance to women in 154 countries."
In April 2017, the U.S. announced that it will cut off funding to
UNFPA, on the grounds that it "supports, or participates in the
management of, a program of coercive abortion or involuntary
sterilization."
UNFPA refuted this claim, as all of its work promotes the human rights
of individuals and couples to make their own decisions, free of coercion
or discrimination. In addition, this is what the United States said during the UNDP/UNFPA/UNOPS Executive Board meeting that considered the China programme in 2015:
“During its recent visit, the U.S. delegation observed the
positive impact of UNFPA’s rights-based programming in China. We commend
the Fund’s adherence to demonstrating the advantages of a voluntary
approach to family planning and were pleased to see – in support of its
ICPD commitments – increased provider emphasis on patient rights.”
Other UN population agencies and entities
Entities with competencies about population in the United Nations:
