International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is protesting UK aid cuts to its flagship pro-abortion program. According to IPPF, “Women’s Integrated Sexual Health (WISH) programme is the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s (FCDO) largest Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) delivery programme. The WISH programme delivers progress towards UK commitments on universal SRHR and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets…in Africa and South Asia.” 

IPPF posted on Facebook that “more than 50% budget cut to our flagship WISH programme”. The amount is equivalent to more than $12 million.

Mina Barling, IPPF Director of External Relations, said: "The UK aid cuts did not happen in isolation. They compounded a transnational far-right regime that began during President Trump’s reign in the United States. In the most extraordinary of circumstances, the space left by civil society meant autocratic actors were now able to move rapidly, shrinking democratic space, and in doing so, exploiting new opportunities to further embed an anti-rights agenda."

“We are reaching a tipping point. We must connect the dots and take action now…”, she continued.

The UK aid cut coincides with as debate in the U.S. Congress over funding for the President’s Emergency Program for Aids Relief (PEPFAR), $6+ billion a year. Pro-life concerns have been raised because the funds are no longer are restricted by Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance (PLGHA) enacted under President Trump which banned funding to international NGOs that provide or promote abortion.

PEPFAR is due for reauthorization for a new five year program, over $30 billion, which President Biden has entitled: Reimagining PEPFAR's Strategic Direction, Fulfilling America’s Promise to End the HIV/AIDS Pandemic by 2030. Reimagined PEPFAR calls for the integration of “HIV programming into strengthened public health systems to manage… sexual reproductive health, rights and services…”, a new vision for PEPFAR. The terms all include access to abortion which PEPFAR cannot directly provide due to the Helms Amendment. Without PLGHA, NGOs can use their ‘own money’ to undertake abortion activities while receiving PEPFAR funds for HIV work.

Congressional Pro-life Caucus Chair Rep. Chris Smith believes that the program has been “hijacked” to advance abortion as a component of sexual and reproductive health and rights through funding of international organizations engaged in abortion calling it an “existential threat to the children of Africa”.

A coalition of 31 pro-life organizations, including Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, Americans United for Life, Students for Life, Heritage Foundation, Family Research Council, the Center for Family and Human Rights, Live Action and the Ethics and Public Policy Center, have joined Smith. They wrote to the Chairs of the House and Senate Foreign Relations Committees asking that Mexico City Policy language be added to PEPFAR so that “no grantees or subgrantees are using taxpayer funds to promote a radical sexual and reproductive health agenda.” 

In response to the pro-life concerns, IPPF wrote that “PEPFAR is at grave risk” and attacked the pro-life voting scorecard of SBA Pro-Life America charging that it “is being utilized by Republicans indulging themselves in a ‘pro-life’ political game…”

IPPF had praised President Biden when he revoked the pro-life policy stating, “IPPF looks on with hope and welcomes the opportunity to work closely with the Biden-Harris administration to protect and advance sexual and reproductive healthcare for all.”  And it is. This includes a partnership with USAID to address ‘HIV/AIDS, family planning, and reproductive health’ in low- and middle-income countries.

When President Trump restored and expanded the Mexico City Policy, IPPF refused to sign the agreement saying, “It means IPPF will lose $100 million USD...”

The Liberian parliament is considering legislation to legalize abortion as it debates amending the Public Health Bill. The proposed changes would permit abortion on demand up to 14 weeks gestation, replacing the country’s current law that prohibits abortion except in cases where the mother’s life is at risk, rape/incest, and fetal anomaly. The Biden Administration and the Swedish governments have both been engaged in the attempt to legalize abortion. One of the groups lobbying for a change in law is the Liberian group Youth Network for Positive Change -YOUNETPO.

YOUNETPO received grants from USAID under its Liberia Civil Society Activity (CSA) and from the International Youth Alliance for Family Planning Global Campaign on Safe Abortion. YOUNETPO writes about its work conducting abortion advocacy campaign at the local level and “petitioning the National Legislature to legalize abortion.” The Swedish government and international pro-abortion activists and NGOs have been active, pressuring officials to open the door to abortion. Sweden helped organize and host the National Conference on SRHR in Liberia designed to “drive transformative change in SRHR”. Dr. Tlaleng Mofokeng, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to health, and the Ambassador of Sweden, Urban Sjostrom, both addressed the conference.

It is estimated the new law would allow the deaths of 40,000 unborn babies every year and is strongly opposed by religious leaders. The Liberian Catholic Bishops Conference called on lawmakers to reflect on the “grave consequences” of not protecting the right to life, saying, “We remind our Catholic lawmakers that they have a grave and clear obligation to oppose any law that attacks human life, as intentionally stated in the abortion section of the Public Health Bill.”

Bishop Kortu K. Brown, president of the Liberian Council of Churches, has organized a website- www.StopAbortionLiberia.com- to educate citizens about the proposed changes to the abortion law in the Public Health Bill and is encouraging them to contact their elected officials. “People throughout Liberia have been rightfully horrified by this abortion section in the Public Health Bill,” said Bishop Brown. “It’s time for Senators to listen to the people of Liberia and remove the abortion section in the Public Health Bill.”

Canada reports that during a panel discussion on ‘SRHR, bodily autonomy and abortion rights’ at the pro-abortion Women Deliver conference in Rwanda, Minister of International Development and Minister responsible for the Pacific Economic Development Agency of Canada, Harjit S. Sajjan, announced that Canada was contributing more than $200 million in funding for new projects as part of Canada’s SheSOARS initiative which supports “neglected and underfunded areas of SRHR, including family planning, comprehensive sexuality education, advocacy for SRHR, safe abortion...”

Harjit S. Sajjan said, “In the face of a growing backlash against women’s rights, it is more important than ever that we support the bodily autonomy of women and girls. Canada is ramping up efforts in neglected, under-funded and over-politicized areas of SRHR…In this vein, Canada is proudly prioritizing family planning, safe abortion and post-abortion care, comprehensive sexuality education, advocacy for SRHR…, with a focus on Africa.”

Canadian MP Kayabaga announced a $10-million allocation for MSI Reproductive Choices, formerly Marie Stopes International, for the “Advancing Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights project” – also part of Canada’s SheSOARS initiative – targeting women and girls in Africa. “I was pleased to see the many new initiatives take shape, leading to more investments and stronger partnerships. I am committed to continue advocating for pathways to advance sexual and reproductive health and rights, in Canada and everywhere. Women deserve the right to choose for their bodies...”

Other projects advancing access to abortion funded by Canada can be found here. It includes $10,000,000 to Ipas for “Increasing Sexual and Reproductive Autonomy in Bolivia, Indonesia and Nigeria”. The project’s goal is to “increase the sexual and reproductive autonomy of women and girls in Bolivia, Indonesia and Nigeria by increasing their access to integrated and comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services, and enhancing their ability to make decisions about their own sexual and reproductive health.”

Ipas also received $4,850,000 for its abortion work in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to “empower women and girls bodily by expanding avenues of access to sexual and reproductive health services and information and safe abortion care. The project will work with government and community partners to translate the DRC's favorable legal and policy framework into improved access to quality comprehensive abortion care…”

On the sidelines of the pro-abortion Women Deliver gathering activists discussed how the path to success requires professionals with ‘a unique set of skills’ while lamenting pro-life gains in some countries. It was reported that activists believe they need climate advocates and those working in tech and governments to help promote their agenda. According to Dr. Samukeliso Dube, executive director of Family Planning 2030, “SRHR can never make progress in isolation.” When asked what’s of most use in the current context, one respondent raised the issue of knowing current affairs especially in regards to funding citing the loss of funding when President Trump reinstated and expanded the Mexico City policy.

An activist from MSI Reproductive Choices said that people with knowledge about opposition to abortion and global abortion politics are welcome. Individuals with knowledge of “innovative health financing” are viewed as beneficial as are experts in communications who understand the importance of terminology so that terms used by the pro-life movement are not repeated. But before anyone ‘enters the SRHR space’ they need to undergo value clarification activities according to the director of Ipas Indonesia who said that everyone has their own biases explaining, “For example, many health providers in reproductive health care don't trust women are able to … take the abortion pill by themselves.”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres issued The Sustainable Development Goals Report Special edition which is critical of laws against abortion labeling them “barriers to accessing sexual and reproductive health care, information and education.” Under the title Invest in women and girls, Priority Actions include—"Dismantle all discriminatory laws and practices, take action to shape social norms that promote gender equality and ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights.”

The Statistical Annex to the report is most critical as it contains indicators that will be used to determine progress on the SDGs including access to abortion as a component of maternity care under Target 5.6: “Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences.”

Indicator 5.6.2 will track: “Number of countries with laws and regulations that guarantee full and equal access to women and men aged 15 years and older to sexual and reproductive health care, information and education.” The third measurement for this target states: “Extent to which countries have laws and regulations that guarantee full and equal access to women aged 15 years and older to maternity care, by component”.

Abortion is listed as the third component with #1Maternity Care; #2 Life Saving Commodities; and #4 Post Abortion Care. The annex lists the number of countries with access to each component globally and by region explaining that the Data is from the UNFPA Global Database, 2022, based on official responses to the United Nations 13th and 12th Inquiry among Governments on Population and Development.

Guterres in his introduction to the report writes that “ambitious, decisive, committed action at the SDG Summit in September and the Summit of the Future next year” is needed as the world is “at a moment of truth and reckoning.” He urges all UN Member States to make 2023 “the moment when we jump-start progress on the SDGs, to create a more peaceful and prosperous future for all”.

The UN General Assembly prepares to meet September 18-19 for the 2023 SDG Summit.

WHO Partnering with MPs to Advance Abortion Globally

The World Health Organization (WHO) announced a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the pro-abortion European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights (EPF) along with the UN Special Research Programme HRP, a key promoter of abortion. The stated purpose of the formalized MoU is the mobilization of political will on sexual and reproductive health and rights with special emphasis on Sustainable Development Targets 3.7 and 5.6 that seek to ensure by 2030 “universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights”. The world is at the half-way mark to the 2030 deadline for the SDGs.

EPF recently criticized Malta for its pro-life policy stating, “As representatives of the European and national Parliaments, we believe that access to safe and legal abortion is a fundamental right that should be guaranteed to all individuals, and is an essential component of women’s health care.”

Pro-life legislators need to be aware that the MoU focuses on three key areas:

• They intend to give “technical support to promote evidence-based laws and policies aligned to WHO normative guidance”. That guidance can be found in WHO’s Abortion Care Guideline which states: Strengthening access to comprehensive abortion care within the health system is fundamental to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) relating to good health and well-being (SDG3) and gender equality (SDG5).
• They seek to “mobilize parliamentarians on awareness raising for sexual and reproductive health, with particular support to low- and middle-income countries”. In other words, the children of parents living in low economic settings are targets.
• They seek “capacity building” so pro-abortion parliamentarians and WHO can more effectively work together to advance access to abortion around the world.

Pro-life legislators can read details of WHO’s law and policy guidance on abortion in Towards a supportive law and policy environment for quality abortion care: evidence brief, a supplement to the Abortion Guideline. According to WHO, laws related to “criminalization, grounds-based approaches, gestational age limits, mandatory waiting periods, third-party authorization, provider restrictions and conscientious objection” need to be overturned as they “pose barriers to access to abortion and have negative effects on the exercise of human rights.”

Read more here.

WHO launched a Civil Society Commission in response to civil society requests “to explore better and more meaningful ways to engage with WHO above and beyond those which already exist” but limits membership to those whose aims and purposes “conform with WHO’s policies”. This appears to exclude pro-life organizations since WHO is radically pro-abortion calling abortion “essential medical care” in 2020 and in Abortion Care Guideline opposing laws and policies restricting abortion including mandatory waiting times, parental notification or consent, and even limits on when during pregnancy an abortion can take place.

The Commission, according to WHO, “provides, for the first time, the ability to channel advice and recommendations in a more structured and systematic manner from civil society to WHO on health priorities and related issues. It will also provide recommendations to support WHO in this engagement at all levels (global, regional and national) towards the achievement of universal health coverage (health for all) as well as the Sustainable Development Goals.”

The Commission and Steering Committee include individuals from leading pro-abortion organizations including IPPF, Pathfinder International, Women Deliver, Women in Global Health and Fòs Feminista. WHO claims that over 350 Organizations have so far applied to be part of the Commission. It issued a notice that in order to advance WHO’s priorities: “WHO Civil Society Commission participants may sometimes due to nature of the work be involved in activities which may necessitate confidentiality and in those cases will be required to sign a standard confidentiality undertaking using the form provided by WHO for this purpose.”

Director General of WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, spoke at the launch mentioning a past dialogue he held, along with IPPF, with CSOs on sexual and reproductive health at which he said, “Sexual and reproductive health and rights are a cornerstone for better health and must be an integral part of universal health coverage.”

UN Human Rights Office Opposes Parental Notification for Youth

The UN Secretary General’s Envoy on Youth issued the YOUTH 2030 A Global Progress Report which lists how many UN entities are engaging on youth priority issues including that 19 are working on sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), including HIV.

Cited as an example UN action on youth is the Youth Rights Advocacy Toolkit issued by the United Nations Human Rights Office in partnership with Education Above All Foundation and Silatech. The toolkit states that the right to health includes access to sexual and reproductive health and rights and that laws or policies which require parental or guardian notification or authorization before accessing “SRHR goods and services” restrict “young people’s access and limit their agency.”

It includes General Comment 22 on the Right to sexual and reproductive health by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which states that as part of the right to sexual and reproductive health youth have the right to “evidence-based information” on all aspects of sexual and reproductive health, including abortion adding that all information should be “treated with privacy and confidentiality.”

The executive director of UNPFA, Dr. Natalia Kanem, wrote an opinion piece claiming that abortion rights are backsliding around the world and that the trend needs to end. She cites headlines from around the world and states that while the headlines “may sound familiar to readers in the United States, none of those headlines are from the U.S. The rollback of progress we see in the U.S. is happening everywhere in the world, part of a regressive trend fueled by a rise in populism, as I recently reported at the United Nations.” 

Her report, Progress in implementing the UNFPA strategic plan, 2022–2025, includes a concern about reduced funding and financing for sexual and reproductive health and rights citing economic fallout from COVID-19 and the conflict in Ukraine, inflation and high energy prices. Despite what she calls a “pushback” in some parts of the world, she stated in the report that UNFPA increased partnerships with other United Nations organizations, women-led and youth-led organizations, and others to “integrate sexual and reproductive health” into broader development policies, programs and frameworks.

UNFPA, she boasted, “improved the integration of sexual and reproductive health into national policies and development frameworks, including those related to universal health coverage benefit packages” and “20 additional countries integrated sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights into policies, plans and accountability frameworks related to universal health coverage” in 2022. UNFPA also “continued to strengthen the skills of adolescents and youth to enable them to make informed decisions about their lives, including their sexual and reproductive health and rights.”

Kanem writes in her opinion, “The pushback against women’s rights, reproductive rights, LGBTQI+ rights and comprehensive sexuality education is global. Efforts to safeguard our hard-won gains must be global as well.” She takes special aim at opposition to sexuality education lamenting that sexuality education is losing support across the world, at the highest levels, referencing the failure to reach consensus at the recent meeting of the Commission on Population and Development over inclusion of the “comprehensive sexuality education” in the outcome document. She concludes that the first step “is to recognize that the erosion of sexual and reproductive health and rights has nothing to do with ‘family’ or ‘community’ values”.

The World Health Organization (WHO) announced a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the pro-abortion European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights (EPF) along with the UN Special Research Programme HRP, a key promoter of abortion. The stated purpose of the formalized MoU is the mobilization of political will on sexual and reproductive health and rights with special emphasis on Sustainable Development Targets 3.7 and 5.6 that seek to ensure by 2030 “universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights”. The world is at the half-way mark to the 2030 deadline for the SDGs.



EPF recently criticized Malta for its pro-life policy stating, “As representatives of the European and national Parliaments, we believe that access to safe and legal abortion is a fundamental right that should be guaranteed to all individuals, and is an essential component of women’s health care.”

Pro-lifers in Colombia have collected enough signatures to request a national vote to amend the constitution to further protect the right to life. The Referendum for Life initiative is seeking to amend Article 11 of Colombia’s Magna Carta that states, “the right to life is inviolable,” to add “from conception.” The referendum requires the support of 5% of voting citizens to advance, which pro-life leader Sara Castellanos says they have. The petition now goes to the Registrar’s Office to verify the 2 million signatures, then to Congress for debate, and if approved, would go to a national referendum. 

Western Australia’s parliament will soon be voting on a bill to remove parental consent from the state’s abortion law, giving girls under 16 open access to abortion. The current law requires underage girls seeking abortion to have a parent or guardian informed and involved in discussions with a physician. The new law would remove those requirements. Conversely, girls under the age of 16 still require parental permission to get their ears pierced. “It is baffling that parental consent is needed for a child to pierce their ears but, if this Bill passes, a child will be able to get an abortion without their parents even knowing,” said Right to Life UK Spokesperson Catherine Robinson. “The proposed law implies that it is of greater significance for a child to have their ears pierced than to have an abortion.”  

New Zealand’s first “Safe Areas” surrounding abortion facilities were instituted this month following their creation in the Contraception, Sterlisation and Abortion (Safe Areas) Amendment Act (2022) passed last year. The new laws criminalize any type of pro-life protest, information sharing, or interaction with persons seeking abortion services in the specified buffer zones. The first six “Safe Areas” are now enforceable and other abortion facilities are eligible to apply for designation which is made on a case-by-case basis by the Governor-General, by Order in Council, with a recommendation bythe Minister of Health, in consultation with the Minister of Justice.

The 5^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling has ended mail-order abortions, . The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under President Biden has permitted the practice since 2021. In the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, the court criticized the FDA for its improper approval process for abortion drugs. “In loosening mifepristone’s safety restrictions, FDA failed to address several important concerns about whether the drug would be safe for the women who use it,” the Court wrote in its opinion. “It failed to consider the cumulative effect of removing several important safeguards at the same time.” The Court’s decision restores important safety precautions on the use of the drugs that had been removed by the Biden Administration.

Pro-life groups celebrated the ruling to end the dangerous practice of mail-order abortion. “The 5th Circuit rightly required the FDA to do its job and restore crucial safeguards for women and girls, including ending illegal mail-order abortions,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Erin Hawley. “Mail-order abortion pills put thousands of women and girls at risk of serious complications from abortion pills every year. We won’t rest until the FDA and the profit-driven abortion industry are held accountable for the suffering they’ve inflicted on women and girls, as well as the deaths of countless unborn children,” said Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America’s State Policy Director Katie Daniel.

A federal appeals court has ruled that women seeking any type of abortion must receive an in-person consultation beforehand. Guam’s law requiring a doctor’s visit was suspended in 2021 by a court injunction. This opened the door to telemedicine abortions, where a patient could receive a prescription for abortion drugs without undergoing an evaluation. The recent ruling overturning the injunction highlighted the importance of the in-person requirement. “The consultation can underscore the medical and moral gravity of an abortion and encourage a robust exchange of information,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Kennth Lee in the ruling. Lee said Guam’s law should be upheld since “the people’s representatives- not judges- decide whether to allow, ban, or regulate abortions.”