Laws governing access to sexual health services and information: contents, protections, and restrictions.

Access to sexual health services and information is critical to achieving the highest attainable standard of sexual health, and enabling legal environments are key to advancing progress in this area. In determining overall alignment with human rights standards to respect, protect, and fulfil sexual health-related rights without discrimination, there are many aspects of laws, including their specificity and content, which impact which sexual health services and information are availed, which are restricted, and for whom. To understand the nature of existing legal provisions surrounding access to sexual health services and information, we analysed the content of 40 laws in English, French, and Spanish from 18 countries for the specific sexual health services and information to which access is ensured or prohibited, and the non-discrimination provisions within these laws. Overall, there was wide variation across countries in the types of laws covering these services and the types and number of services and information ensured. Some countries covered different services through multiple laws, and most of the laws dedicated specifically to sexual health addressed only a narrow aspect of sexual health and covered a small range of services. The protected characteristics in non-discrimination provisions and the specificity of these provisions with regard to sexual health services also varied. Findings may inform national legal and policy dialogues around sexual health to identify opportunities for positive change, as well as to guide further investigation to understand the relationship between such legal provisions, the implementation of these laws within countries, and relevant sexual health outcomes.

Access to sexual health services and information is important to being able to have good sexual health. Laws are relevant because what they include and how specific they are affects what types of sexual health services people can access, what types of services are illegal, and whether or not all people can access services equally. We reviewed 40 laws in English, French, and Spanish from 18 countries to understand how many and which sexual health services and information countries ensure in their laws, which sexual health services are illegal, and which people are protected from discrimination in accessing these services. We found that countries use many different types of laws to ensure access to sexual health services or information, and most countries do not cover the same types or number of sexual health services. There are also differences in which people are specifically protected from discrimination in the laws we reviewed. These findings are important because they may help countries identify ways that access to sexual health services and information could be improved so as to improve people's sexual health. They may also guide future research.

The ubiquity of 'self-care' in health: Why specificity matters.

Despite increased interest in self-care for health, little consensus exists around its definition and scope. The World Health Organization has published several definitions of self-care, including in a 2019 Global Guideline rooted in sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), later expanded to encompass health more generally. To establish a robust understanding of self-care, this exploratory study inventorises, consolidates, presents and analyses definitions of self-care beyond the SRHR field. A pragmatic review identified definitions and conceptualisations of self-care from peer-reviewed and grey literature published between 2009 and 2021. The search identified 91 definitions of self-care from 116 relevant publications. Data extraction informed analysis to identify recurring themes and approaches, revealing three key areas of variation: self-care being: (1) defined directly or descriptively; (2) situated within individual, interpersonal or structural contexts; (3) defined broadly or topic-specifically. A multilevel conceptualisation can guide a more broadly applicable understanding of self-care: first, as an aspect of healthcare; second, as a concept operating at individual, interpersonal and institutional levels; third, as a concept that impacts specific health fields and contexts differently. A comprehensive but adaptable framework works in service of improving health and wellbeing for all, acknowledging the linkages between self-care and health-related human rights.

Systematic review and quantitative and qualitative comparative analysis of interventions to address HIV-related stigma and discrimination.

A strong global commitment exists to eliminate HIV-related stigma and discrimination, and multiple strategies to reduce or eliminate stigma and discrimination have been tried. Using a PICOTS framework and applying the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, we undertook a systematic review to determine the success of interventions aiming to address internalized stigma, stigma and discrimination in healthcare, and at the legal or policy level, and to identify their critical success factors. Random effects meta-analyses summarized results wherever possible. We carried out a component analysis to identify and characterize successful interventions. Internalized stigma interventions were diverse: across all studies, we found a reduction of stigma but it was not statistically significant [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.56; confidence interval (CI) 0.31-1.02; 17 studies). For interventions to address stigma and discrimination in healthcare settings, effect estimates varied considerably but most studies showed positive effects (SMD 0.71; CI 0.60-0.84, 8 studies). Boosted regression analyses found that a combined approach comprising education, counseling, community participation, support person, and access to a HIV specialist often yielded success. Studies of efforts to address stigma and discrimination through law and policy documented, mostly qualitatively, the effect of court cases and directives. Across a range of settings and populations, promising interventions have been identified that, through diverse pathways, have positively impacted the types of stigma and discrimination studied. This evidence base must be built upon and brought to scale to help reach global HIV-related targets and, most importantly, improve the health and quality of life of people with HIV.

Leaving No One Behind: Human Rights and Gender as Critical Frameworks for U=U.

Experience has shown the need to explicitly address human rights and gender-related barriers in the rollout of HIV-related biomedical innovations, including "undetectable equals untransmittable" (U=U). This paper brings to light rights and gender considerations relevant to supporting U=U, recognizing a range of barriers that remain to be addressed for all people to benefit equally from U=U. We conducted a literature review to ascertain how human rights and gender were addressed in relevant publications, including peer-reviewed articles published between 2006 and 2020, relevant nongovernmental and global organizations' publications, and abstracts presented at the 2019 International AIDS Conference, that explicitly addressed U=U or "treatment as prevention." Despite evidence to illustrate the importance of attention to human rights and gender within U=U policies and interventions, there remains a lack of explicit attention to human rights and gender considerations in research and programming, particularly with regard to the rights principles of participation and accountability. Explicitly engaging all of these dimensions is key to informing interventions and improving people's lives, health, and well-being.

Frameworks and measures for HIV-related internalized stigma, stigma and discrimination in healthcare and in laws and policies: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: There is strong global commitment to eliminate HIV-related stigma, and work in this area continues to evolve. Wide variation exists in frameworks and measures used. METHODS: Building on the existing knowledge syntheses, we carried out a systematic review to identify frameworks and measures aiming to understand or assess internalized stigma, stigma and discrimination in healthcare, and in law and policy. The review addressed two questions: Which conceptual frameworks have been proposed to assess internalized stigma, stigma and discrimination experienced in healthcare settings, and stigma and discrimination entrenched in national laws and policies? Which measures of these different types of stigma and discrimination have been proposed and what are their descriptive properties? Searches, completed on 6 May 2021, cover publications from 2008 onwards. The review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021249348), the protocol incorporated stakeholder input, and the data are available in the Systematic Review Data Repository. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Sixty-nine frameworks and 50 measures met the inclusion criteria. Critical appraisal figures and detailed evidence tables summarize these resources. We established a compendium of frameworks and a catalogue of measures of HIV-related stigma and discrimination. Seventeen frameworks and 10 measures addressed at least two of our focus domains, with least attention to stigma and discrimination in law and policy. The lack of common definitions and variability in scope and structure of HIV-related frameworks and measures creates challenges in understanding what is being addressed and measured, both in relation to stigma and efforts to mitigate or reduce its harmful effects. Having comparable data is essential for tracking change over time within and between interventions. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides an evidence base of current understandings of HIV-related stigma and discrimination and how further conceptual clarification and increased adaptation of existing tools might help overcome challenges across the HIV care continuum. With people living with HIV at the centre, experts from different stakeholder groups could usefully collaborate to guide a more streamlined approach for the field. This can help to achieve global targets and understand, measure and help mitigate the impact of different types of HIV-related stigma on people's health and quality of life.

Frameworks, measures, and interventions for HIV-related internalised stigma and stigma in healthcare and laws and policies: systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: There is strong global commitment to eliminate HIV-related stigma. Wide variation exists in frameworks and measures, and many strategies to prevent, reduce or mitigate stigma have been proposed but critical factors determining success or failure remain elusive. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Building on existing knowledge syntheses, we designed a systematic review to identify frameworks, measures and intervention evaluations aiming to address internalised stigma, stigma and discrimination in healthcare, and stigma and discrimination at the legal or policy level. The review addresses four key questions (KQ): KQ1: Which conceptual frameworks have been proposed to assess internal stigma, stigma and discrimination experienced in healthcare settings, and stigma and discrimination entrenched in national laws and policies? KQ2: Which measures of stigma have been proposed and what are their descriptive properties? KQ3: Which interventions have been evaluated that aimed to reduce these types of stigma and discrimination or mitigate their adverse effects and what are the effectiveness and unintended consequences? KQ4: What common 'critical factors for success or failure' can be identified across interventions that have been evaluated? We will search PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Universal Human Rights Index, HeinOnline, PAIS, HIV Legal Network, CDSR, Campbell Collaboration, PROSPERO and Open Science Framework. Critical appraisal will assess the source, processes and consensus finding for frameworks; COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments criteria for measures; and risk of bias for interventions. Quality of evidence grading will apply . A gap analysis will provide targeted recommendations for future research. We will establish a compendium of frameworks, a comprehensive catalogue of available measures, and a synthesis of intervention characteristics to advance the science of HIV-related stigma. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021249348.

Integrating human rights into sexual and reproductive health research: moving beyond the rhetoric, what will it take to get us there?

The integration of human rights principles in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) research is often recognised to be of value. Good examples abound but lack of clarity persists as to what defines rights-inclusive SRH research. To help move the field forward, this article seeks to explore how key stakeholders responsible for funding and supporting rights in SRH research understand the strengths and weaknesses of what is being done and where, and begins to catalogue potential tools and actions for the future. Interviews with a range of key stakeholders including international civil servants, donors and researchers committed to and supportive of integrating rights into SRH research were conducted and analysed. Interviews confirmed important differences in what is understood to be SRH rights-oriented research and what it can accomplish. General barriers include lack of understanding about the importance of rights; lack of clarity as to the best approach to integration; fear of adding more work with little added benefit; as well as the lack of methodological guidance or published research methodologies that integrate rights. Suggestions include the development of a comprehensive checklist for each phase of research from developing a research statement through ultimately to publication; development of training modules and workshops; inclusion of rights in curricula; changes in journal requirements; and agreement among key funding sources to mandate the integration of rights principles in research proposals they receive. As a next step, cataloguing issues and concerns at local levels can help move the integration of human rights in SRH research from rhetoric to reality.

Law, human rights and gender in practice: an analysis of lessons from implementation of self-care interventions for sexual and reproductive health.

Self-care interventions for health are becoming increasingly available, and among the preferred options, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. This research assessed the extent of attention to laws and policies, human rights and gender in the implementation of self-care interventions for sexual and reproductive health (SRH), to identify where additional efforts to ensure an enabling environment for their use and uptake will be useful. A literature review of relevant studies published between 2010 and 2020 was conducted using PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Relevant data were systematically abstracted from 61 articles. In March-April 2021, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 key informants, selected for their experience implementing self-care interventions for SRH, and thematically analysed. Laws and policies, rights and gender are not being systematically addressed in the implementation of self-care interventions for SRH. Within countries, there is varied attention to the enabling environment including the acceptability of interventions, privacy, informed consent and gender concerns as they impact both access and use of specific self-care interventions, while other legal considerations appear to have been under-prioritised. Operational guidance is needed to develop and implement supportive laws and policies, as well as to ensure the incorporation of rights and gender concerns in implementing self-care interventions for SRH.

Inclusion of human rights in sexual and reproductive health programming: Facilitators and barriers to implementation.

The need to prioritise those furthest behind is well understood in global health circles, and how human rights norms and standards can help often touted. As rights concerns are particularly recognised in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) programming, as part of a larger exercise, a review was conducted to identify documented barriers and facilitators to implementation. Given the role global guidance plays in implementing rights-based approaches to SRH, UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP) guidelines, tools, recommendations and guidance that include the explicit mention of human rights principles served as the basis for this exercise. This was followed by an extensive review of the literature. Sources reviewed confirmed barriers include not only broad structural, policy and health systems barriers but financial, staffing and time constraints, as well as lack of understanding of concretely how to include human rights in these efforts. Facilitators include the existence of human rights champions, leadership, strong civil society participation, training, and funding made available specifically for implementation. Investment in indicators and documentation sensitive to human rights is warranted in sexual and reproductive health, as well as other health topics, to best serve populations who need them most.

Expanding the role of paralegals: supporting realization of the right to health for vulnerable communities.

BACKGROUND: All around the world, the paralegal program prepares members of marginalized communities to face the legal system. Having a common background with their clients and being capable of conducting flexible work, paralegals' role moves beyond enlarging the beneficiaries of legal aid to addressing intersectional issues around health-related rights. This study assesses the health and other impacts of paralegals recruited by Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat (LBHM), a human rights organization which provides legal assistance and operates in Jakarta, Indonesia. The positive results these paralegals can bring in the specific context can contribute to the development of community-based paralegals elsewhere. METHODS: This mixed methods research was carried out in 2016-2018. In 2016, a quantitative survey was administered to LBHM-trained paralegals and a sub-set of paralegals who completed the survey were then also interviewed. Quantitative data were analysed using SPSS, and, for the qualitative data, thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The paralegals make important contributions to health-related rights in four distinct ways. Firstly, most of the paralegals checked their clients' health in all stages of detention, especially regarding their drug dependency status and checking for signs of torture. Secondly, paralegals help clients to be more aware of their health-related rights, especially regarding their rights to obtain health services inside detention. Thirdly, paralegals can ensure that their clients obtain health services by taking medicines directly to the clients or encouraging the law enforcement agencies to refer the clients to health services. Lastly, in drug cases, paralegals help their clients to obtain alternative sentences besides imprisonment. CONCLUSIONS: These four contributions verify the positive impacts paralegals, recruited from marginalized communities, can deliver for community members facing criminal justice processes. The shifting role of paralegals from merely an intermediary between clients and lawyers to champions of the health-related rights of their clients can happen as a result of adequate training, support, and networks with other agents in criminal justice system.