Ignorance Only: HIV/AIDS, Human Rights And Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Programs in the United States

Programs teaching teenagers to "just say no" to sex before marriage are threatening adolescent health by censoring basic information about how to prevent HIV/AIDS, Human Rights Watch charged in a new report released today. The forty-seven page report focuses on federally funded "abstinence-only-until-marriage" programs in Texas, where advertising campaigns convey the message that teenagers should not use condoms because they don't work. Some school-based programs in Texas do not mention condoms at all. Federal health agencies share the broad scientific consensus that condoms, when used correctly, are highly effective in preventing the transmission of HIV. Yet the U.S. government currently spends more than $100 million each year on "abstinence-only-until-marriage" programs, which cannot by law "promote or endorse" condoms or provide instruction regarding their use. The Bush administration is advocating a 33 percent increase in funding for these programs

Still Searching: How People Use Health Care Price Information in the United States, New York State, Florida, Texas and New Hampshire

Americans bear a large and growing share of their health care costs in the form of high deductibles and insurance premiums, as well as copayments and, sometimes, coinsurance for physician office visits and hospitalizations. Historically, the health care system has not made it easy for people to find out how much their care will cost them out of pocket. But, in recent years, insurers, state governments, employers and other entities have been trying to make price information more easily available to individuals and families. Are Americans trying to find out about health care prices today? Do they want more information? What sources would they trust to deliver it?This nationally representative research finds 50 percent of Americans have tried to find health care price information before getting care, including 20 percent who have tried to compare prices across multiple providers. Representative surveys in four states— New York, Texas, Florida and New Hampshire—show higher percentages of residents in Texas, Florida and New Hampshire have tried to find price information and have compared prices than New York residents and Americans overall. This variation suggests factors at the state level might be influencing how many people try to find out about health care costs. Nationally and in those four states, more than half of people who compared prices report saving money. Most Americans overall think it is important for their state governments to provide comparative price information. But we found limited awareness that doctors' prices vary and limited awareness that hospitals' prices vary.Public Agenda conducted this research with support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the New York State Health Foundation. The findings are based on a nationally representative survey of 2,062 adults, ages 18 and older, and a set of representative surveys in four states: one survey of 802 adults in New York, one of 808 adults in Texas, one of 819 adults in Florida and one of 826 adults in New Hampshire. The surveys were conducted from July through September 2016 by telephone, including cell phones, and online

Why Let the People Decide? Elected Officials on Participatory Budgeting

This report documents findings from interviews with U.S. elected officials regarding their experience with participatory budgeting (PB). It also includes recommendations for policymakers, PB advocates and funders looking to improve and expand PB

Public Spending, By The People: Participatory Budgeting in the United States and Canada in 2014-15

From 2014 to 2015, more than 70,000 residents across the United States and Canada directly decided how their cities and districts should spend nearly $50 million in public funds through a process known as participatory budgeting (PB). PB is among the fastest growing forms of public engagement in local governance, having expanded to 46 communities in the U.S. and Canada in just 6 years.PB is a young practice in the U.S. and Canada. Until now, there's been no way for people to get a general understanding of how communities across the U.S. implement PB, who participates, and what sorts of projects get funded. Our report, "Public Spending, By the People" offers the first-ever comprehensive analysis of PB in the U.S. and Canada.Here's a summary of what we found:Overall, communities using PB have invested substantially in the process and have seen diverse participation. But cities and districts vary widely in how they implemented their processes, who participated and what projects voters decided to fund. Officials vary in how much money they allocate to PB and some communities lag far behind in their representation of lower-income and less educated residents.The data in this report came from 46 different PB processes across the U.S. and Canada. The report is a collaboration with local PB evaluators and practitioners. The work was funded by the Democracy Fund and the Rita Allen Foundation, and completed through a research partnership with the Kettering Foundation

Access to pain treatment as a human right

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Almost five decades ago, governments around the world adopted the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs which, in addition to addressing the control of illicit narcotics, obligated countries to work towards universal access to the narcotic drugs necessary to alleviate pain and suffering. Yet, despite the existence of inexpensive and effective pain relief medicines, tens of millions of people around the world continue to suffer from moderate to severe pain each year without treatment.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Significant barriers to effective pain treatment include: the failure of many governments to put in place functioning drug supply systems; the failure to enact policies on pain treatment and palliative care; poor training of healthcare workers; the existence of unnecessarily restrictive drug control regulations and practices; fear among healthcare workers of legal sanctions for legitimate medical practice; and the inflated cost of pain treatment. These barriers can be understood not only as a failure to provide essential medicines and relieve suffering but also as human rights abuses.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>According to international human rights law, countries have to provide pain treatment medications as part of their core obligations under the right to health; failure to take reasonable steps to ensure that people who suffer pain have access to adequate pain treatment may result in the violation of the obligation to protect against cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.</p

Addressing the development dimensions of drug policy.

The relationship between drug control policy and human development is complex and multifaceted; both share a common objective to reduce drug-related harms. Yet policies aimed at prohibiting and punishing the cultivation, sale and use of certain drugs have played a disproportionate role in shaping the international approach to drug control and country responses, irrespective of countries’ development goals. Drug control policies have been justified by the real and potential harms associated with illicit drug use and markets, such as threats to safety and security, public health, crime, decreased productivity, unemployment and poverty. However, evidence shows that in many countries, drug control policies and related enforcement activities focused on reducing supply and demand have had little effect in eradicating production or problematic drug use. Various UN organizations have also described the harmful collateral consequences of these eff orts: creating a criminal black market; fuelling corruption, violence and instability; undermining public health and safety; generating large-scale human rights abuses, including abusive and inhumane punishments; and discrimination and marginalization of people who use drugs, indigenous peoples, women and youth. Evidence shows that in many parts of the world, law enforcement responses to drug-related crime have created or exacerbated poverty, impeded sustainable development and public health and undermined human rights of the most marginalized people. 1. Introduction p.9 2. The Impact of Drug Control Policy on Human Development p.12 2.1 Poverty and sustainable livelihoods p.13 2.2 Impact on public health p.15 2.3 Impact on the formal economy p.20 2.4 Impact on governance, conflict and the rule of law p.22 2.5 Human rights implications of drug policy p.24 2.6 Gender dimensions p.26 2.7 Impact of drug control policies on the environment p.27 2.8 Impact of drug control policies on indigenous people and traditional and religious practices p.28 3. Sustainable Development Approaches to Drug Policy p.30 3.1 Development-sensitive policy and programming p.32 4. Opportunities to Address Development Dimensions of Drug Control Policy p.35 4.1 New metrics to evaluate drug control policies p.35 4.2 Drug policy and the post-2015 agenda p.36 4.3 The road to UNGASS 2016: an opportunity to increase coherence in the UN system p.37 5. Conclusion p.3

Autonomía y capacidad legal de las personas mayores: conceptos, mecanismos de protección y oportunidades de incidencia

En la base de la discriminación por edad se ubica la privación de la capacidad jurídica de las personas mayores y, por consiguiente, la limitación de su autonomía y de su poder para tomar decisiones. En este artículo se realiza un acercamiento al tema de la capacidad legal de este grupo social y los mecanismos necesarios para protegerla, y se analizan las oportunidades de incidencia a nivel internacional, regional y nacional para garantizar el igual reconocimiento de las personas mayores ante la ley

El acceso al tratamiento del dolor como derecho humano

Antecedentes: Casi diez años atrás, en 1961 varios países del mundo adoptaron la Convención Única sobre Estupefacientes, que además de referirse al tema del control de drogas ilícitas, exigía a los países trabajar en contribución del acceso universal de drogas ilícitas necesarias para aliviar el dolor y el sufrimiento. Sin embargo, a pesar de la existencia de medicamentos eficaces y de bajo costo para el alivio del dolor, millones de personas en todo el mundo siguen padeciendo, cada año, dolores moderados e intensos que no son tratados. Discusión: Algunos de los obstáculos importantes que impiden desarrollar un tratamiento eficaz del dolor son: el fracaso de muchos gobiernos para poner en marcha sistemas efectivos de suministro de medicamentos, el hecho de no promulgar políticas sobre el tratamiento del dolor y el cuidado paliativo, la deficiente formación de los profesionales de la salud, la existencia innecesaria de prácticas y regulaciones restrictivas de control de drogas, el miedo existente entre los profesionales de la salud sobre las sanciones legales existentes para la práctica médica legítima y el alto costo que tiene el tratamiento para el alivio del dolor. Estos obstáculos se pueden interpretar no sólo como un fracaso para proporcionar medicamentos esenciales y aliviar el sufrimiento, sino también como violaciones a los derechos humanos. Síntesis: Según las leyes de derechos humanos, los países tienen como obligación proporcionar medicinas para el alivio del dolor como parte de las obligaciones ligadas al derecho a la salud; el no tomar las medidas necesarias para asegurarle a las personas el acceso a tratamientos adecuados del alivio del dolor, puede tener como consecuencia la violación de la obligación con la que deben cumplir todos los estados de proteger a los individuos de todo trato cruel, inhumano y degradante

Longitudinal trajectories of cortical development in 22q11.2 copy number variants and typically developing controls

Probing naturally-occurring, reciprocal genomic copy number variations (CNVs) may help us understand mechanisms that underlie deviations from typical brain development. Cross-sectional studies have identified prominent reductions in cortical surface area (SA) and increased cortical thickness (CT) in 22q11.2 deletion carriers (22qDel), with the opposite pattern in duplication carriers (22qDup), but the longitudinal trajectories of these anomalies-and their relationship to clinical symptomatology-are unknown. Here, we examined neuroanatomic changes within a longitudinal cohort of 261 22q11.2 CNV carriers and demographically-matched typically developing (TD) controls (84 22qDel, 34 22qDup, and 143 TD; mean age 18.35,&nbsp;±10.67 years; 50.47% female). A total of 431 magnetic resonance imaging scans (164 22qDel, 59 22qDup, and 208 TD control scans; mean interscan interval = 20.27 months) were examined. Longitudinal FreeSurfer analysis pipelines were used to parcellate the cortex and calculate average CT and SA for each region. First, general additive mixed models (GAMMs) were used to identify regions with between-group differences in developmental trajectories. Secondly, we investigated whether these trajectories were associated with clinical outcomes. Developmental trajectories of CT were more protracted in 22qDel relative to TD and 22qDup. 22qDup failed to show normative age-related SA decreases. 22qDel individuals with psychosis spectrum symptoms showed two distinct periods of altered CT trajectories relative to 22qDel without psychotic symptoms. In contrast, 22q11.2 CNV carriers with autism spectrum diagnoses showed early alterations in SA trajectories. Collectively, these results provide new insights into altered neurodevelopment in 22q11.2 CNV carriers, which may shed light on neural mechanisms underlying distinct clinical outcomes