Reporte sobre Costa Rica, enviado para consideración del Comité de los Derechos del Niño y la Niña en su 83 periodo de sesiones.

En esta carta, i) se ilustra la gravedad de la violencia sexual en contra de niñas y adolescentes en el país, la falta de acceso real a la anticoncepción oral de emergencia (AOE), y a la interrupción del embarazo en estos casos; y ii) llama la atención sobre otros temas de preocupación en relación a la salud sexual y reproductiva de niñas y adolescentes, relativos a la falta de información oficial en temas de salud sexual y reproductiva, y la falta de coordinación entre las autoridades a cargo de velar por la protección de las niñas y adolescentes en el país. Finalmente, incluye una lista de recomendaciones y preguntas

Gender Justice in the Americas: A Transnational Dialogue on Violence, Sexuality, Reproduction, and Human Rights University

On February 23-25, 2011, over 100 women\u27s rights, gender, and sexuality advocates and scholars from twenty countries in North, South, and Central America and the Caribbean gathered at the University of Miami in Miami, Florida to attend a groundbreaking convening, Gender Justice in the Americas: A Transnational Dialogue on Violence, Sexuality, Reproduction, and Human Rights. The Convening, hosted by the University of Miami School of Law Human Rights Clinic, University of Diego Portales Human Rights Center, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and Columbia Law School Human Rights Institute, brought together key players in the region to exchange views and discuss strategies to advance gender justice in the areas of violence against women, sexual and reproductive rights, socio-economic justice and women\u27s human rights. This Post-Conference Report provides a summary of the transnational conversation that took place over the course of this three-day event

Human rights accountability for maternal death and failure to provide safe, legal abortion: the significance of two ground-breaking CEDAW decisions.

In 2011, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) issued two landmark decisions. In Alyne da Silva Pimentel v. Brazil, the first maternal death case decided by an international human rights body, it confirms that States have a human rights obligation to guarantee that all women, irrespective of their income or racial background, have access to timely, non-discriminatory, and appropriate maternal health services. In L.C. v. Peru, concerning a 13-year-old rape victim who was denied a therapeutic abortion and had an operation on her spine delayed that left her seriously disabled as a result, it established that the State should guarantee access to abortion when a woman's physical or mental health is in danger, decriminalise abortion when pregnancy results from rape or sexual abuse, review its restrictive interpretation of therapeutic abortion and establish a mechanism to ensure that reproductive rights are understood and observed in all health care facilities. Both cases affirm that accessible and good quality health services are vital to women's human rights and expand States' obligations in relation to these. They also affirm that States must ensure national accountability for sexual and reproductive health rights, and provide remedies and redress in the event of violations. And they reaffirm the importance of international human rights bodies as sources of accountability for sexual and reproductive rights violations, especially where national accountability is absent or ineffective

No One Could Say: Accessing Emergency Obstetrics Information as a Prospective Prenatal Patient in Post-Roe Oklahoma

This report by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Physicians for Human Rights, and Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice raises concerns about pregnant patients' ability to access life-saving obstetric care in states where abortion is banned

The Oliver C. Schroeder, Jr. Scholar-in-Residence Lecture: Sneaking Around the Constitution: Pretextual Health Laws and the Future of Roe v. Wade

A speech delivered by Nancy Northup, President and chief executive officer (CEO) of the U.S. Center for Reproductive Rights. It discusses the consequences of the U.S. Supreme Court\u27s decision in case \u27Roe v. Wade\u27 on pretextual health law

On All Fronts: 2021 Annual Report

The Center for Reproductive Rights uses the power of law to advance reproductive rights as fundamental human rights around the world. We envision a world where every person participates with dignity as an equal member of society, regardless of gender; where every woman is free to decide whether or when to have children and whether to get married; where access to quality reproductive health care is guaranteed; and where every woman can make these decisions free from coercion or discrimination

The State of the States: Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers in 2013

The State of the States focuses on laws enacted in 2013 in four categories of abortion restrictions that the Center identifies as the most significant trends: abortion bans, restrictions on medication abortion, restrictions on insurance coverage for abortion, and targeted regulation of abortion providers ("TRAP")

Care in Crisis: Failures to guarantee the sexual and reproductive health and rights of refugees from Ukraine in Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia

This report from The Center for Reproductive Rights and eight partner organizations documents the gaps and barriers in access to sexual and reproductive healthcare and gender-based violence support services that are faced by refugees from Ukraine in Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. The report found that legal restrictions, burdensome costs, information shortfalls and other barriers, mean that some refugees are facing a harrowing choice between returning to Ukraine to access essential reproductive healthcare, accessing care outside legal pathways in their host countries or going without much-needed care, according to the new report

Population policies and education: exploring the contradictions of neo-liberal globalisation

The world is increasingly characterised by profound income, health and social inequalities (Appadurai, 2000). In recent decades development initiatives aimed at reducing these inequalities have been situated in a context of increasing globalisation with a dominant neo-liberal economic orthodoxy. This paper argues that neo-liberal globalisation contains inherent contradictions regarding choice and uniformity. This is illustrated in this paper through an exploration of the impact of neo-liberal globalisation on population policies and programmes. The dominant neo-liberal economic ideology that has influenced development over the last few decades has often led to alternative global visions being overlooked. Many current population and development debates are characterised by polarised arguments with strongly opposing aims and views. This raises the challenge of finding alternatives situated in more middle ground that both identify and promote the socially positive elements of neo-liberalism and state intervention, but also to limit their worst excesses within the population field and more broadly. This paper concludes with a discussion outling the positive nature of middle ground and other possible alternatives