Hostilities faced by people on the frontlines of sexual and reproductive health and rights: a scoping review.

Frontline workers for sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) provide life-changing and life-saving services to millions of people every year. From accompanying the pregnant, delivering babies and caring for the newborn to supporting those subjected to sexual violence; from treating debilitating infections to expanding contraceptive choices; from enabling access to safe abortion services to countering homophobia: all over the world frontline SRHR carers and advocates make it possible for so many more to experience dignity in sex, sexuality and reproduction. Yet they are also subjected to hostility for what they do, for whom they provide care, for where they work and for the issues they address. From ostracistion and harassment in the workplace to verbal threats and physical violence, hostilities can extend even into their private lives. In other words, as SRHR workers seek to fulfil the human rights of others, their own human rights are put at risk. Yet, as grave as that is, it is a reality largely undocumented and thus also underestimated. This scoping review sets out to marshal what is known about how hostilities against frontline SRHR workers manifest, against whom, at whose hands and in which contexts. It is based on review of six sources: peer-reviewed and grey literature, news reports, sector surveys, and consultations with sector experts and, for contrast, literature issued by opposition groups. Each source contributes a partial picture only, yet taken together, they show that hostilities against frontline SRHR workers are committed the world over-in a range of countries, contexts and settings. Nevertheless, the narratives given in those sources more often treat hostilities as 'one-off', exceptional events and/or as an 'inevitable' part of daily work to be tolerated. That works in turn both to divorce such incidents from their wider historical, political and social contexts and to normalise the phenomena as if it is an expected part of a role and not a problem to be urgently addressed. Our findings confirm that the SRHR sector at large needs to step-up its response to such reprisals in ways more commensurate with their scale and gravity.

Budget transparency on maternal health spending: a case study in five Latin American countries.

Progress in reducing maternal mortality has been slow and uneven, including in Latin America, where 23,000 women die each year from preventable causes. This article is about the challenges civil society organizations in Latin America faced in assessing budget transparency on government spending on specific aspects of maternity care, in order to hold them accountable for reducing maternal deaths. The study was carried out by the International Planned Parenthood, Western Hemisphere Region and the International Budget Partnership in five Latin American countries--Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panama and Peru. It found that only in Peru was most of the information they sought available publicly (from a government website). In the other four countries, none of the information was available publicly, and although it was possible to obtain at least some data from ministry and health system sources, the search process often took a complex course. The data collected in each country were very different, depending not only on the level of budget transparency, but also on the existence and form of government data collection systems. The obstacles that these civil society organizations faced in monitoring national and local budget allocations for maternal health must be addressed through better budgeting modalities on the part of governments. Concrete guidelines are also needed for how governments can better capture data and track local and national progress.