Analysing governments' progress on the right to health.

Objective: To examine the influence of varying articulations of the right to health under domestic constitutions, legislation and jurisprudence on the scope of legal protection for health. Methods: We investigated legal recognition of the right to health, by conducting a three-level search. First, we searched databases containing constitutional texts. Second, we did a thematic analysis of those constitutional texts with explicit constitutional recognition of health rights, employing NVivo for coding. For the 54 World Health Organization (WHO) Member States without explicit constitutional provisions, we explored statutory paths, judicial constructions and instances where both methods contributed to the acknowledgement of health rights. Lastly, we confirmed evidence of jurisprudence constructing a right to health based on a combination of domestic law and international human rights norms incorporated directly into the text. Findings: We identified 140 WHO Member States with a constitutionalized right to health. Our analysis suggests there are notable variations in the legal scope of protection for health, including breadth of entitlements and the possibility of enforcing these rights through the legal system. We also highlight the critical importance of constitutional acknowledgement, legislative measures, and judicial interpretations in shaping the legal entitlements to health-care services, affecting their accessibility and financial support. Conclusion: The analysis offers insights for policy-makers to assess different approaches to health-related entitlements, with implications for health financing and the evaluation of Member States' strides towards universal access to comprehensive care. This analysis also illuminates how distinct formulations of the right to health have varied effects on reducing health disparities.

Unique challenges for health equity in Latin America: situating the roles of priority-setting and judicial enforcement.

Overcoming continuing polarization regarding judicial enforcement of health rights in Latin America requires clarifying divergent normative and political premises, addressing the lack of reliable empirical data, and establishing the conditions for fruitful inter-sectoral, inter-disciplinary dialogue.

Realizing Universal Health Coverage in East Africa: the relevance of human rights.

Applying a robust human rights framework would change thinking and decision-making in efforts to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC), and advance efforts to promote women's, children's, and adolescents' health in East Africa, which is a priority under the Sustainable Development Agenda. Nevertheless, there is a gap between global rhetoric of human rights and ongoing health reform efforts. This debate article seeks to fill part of that gap by setting out principles of human rights-based approaches (HRBAs), and then applying those principles to questions that countries undertaking efforts toward UHC and promoting women's, children's and adolescents' health, will need to face, focusing in particular on ensuring enabling legal and policy frameworks, establishing fair financing; priority-setting processes, and meaningful oversight and accountability mechanisms. In a region where democratic institutions are notoriously weak, we argue that the explicit application of a meaningful human rights framework could enhance equity, participation and accountability, and in turn the democratic legitimacy of health reform initiatives being undertaken in the region.

The Effects of Maternal Mortality on Infant and Child Survival in Rural Tanzania: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: The full impact of a maternal death includes consequences faced by orphaned children. This analysis adds evidence to a literature on the magnitude of the association between a woman's death during or shortly after childbirth, and survival outcomes for her children. METHODS: The Ifakara and Rufiji Health and Demographic Surveillance Sites in rural Tanzania conduct longitudinal, frequent data collection of key demographic events at the household level. Using a subset of the data from these sites (1996-2012), this survival analysis compared outcomes for children who experienced a maternal death (42 and 365 days definitions) during or near birth to those children whose mothers survived. RESULTS: There were 111 maternal deaths (or 229 late maternal deaths) during the study period, and 46.28 % of the index children also subsequently died (40.73 % of children in the late maternal death group) before their tenth birthday-a much higher prevalence of child mortality than in the population of children whose mothers survived (7.88 %, p value <0.001). Children orphaned by early maternal deaths had a 51.54 % chance of surviving to their first birthday, compared to a 94.42 % probability for children of surviving mothers. A significant, but lesser, child survival effect was also found for paternal deaths in this study period. CONCLUSIONS: The death of a mother compromises the survival of index children. Reducing maternal mortality through improved health care-especially provision of high-quality skilled birth attendance, emergency obstetric services and neonatal care-will also help save children's lives.

From ideals to tools: applying human rights to maternal health.

Alicia Yamin argues that applying human rights frameworks and approaches to maternal health offers strategies and tools to address the root causes of maternal morbidity and mortality within and beyond health systems, in addition to addressing other violations of women's sexual and reproductive health and rights. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Embedding sexual and reproductive health and rights in a transformational development framework: lessons learned from the MDG targets and indicators.

This paper explores the intended and unintended consequences of the selection of MDG 5 as a global goal, together with its respective targets and indicators, and places what happened to MDG 5, and sexual and reproductive health and rights more broadly, into the context of the development model that was encoded in the MDGs. Over the last decade, as the MDGs increasingly took centre stage in development and their use evolved, they were inappropriately converted from global goals into national planning targets. This conversion was particularly detrimental in the case of MDG 5. It not only created a narrowing in terms of policies and programming, but also had an enormous impact on the discourse of development itself, reshaping the field in terms of the organization and dissemination of knowledge, and underscoring that the process of setting targets and indicators is far from neutral but encodes normative values. Looking forward, it is not adequate to propose an MDG+ framework based on the same structure. Sexual and reproductive health and rights must be placed back into the global discourse, using development to empower women and marginalized populations, and to address structural inequalities that are fundamental to sustained social change. The new development framework should include a strong narrative of social transformation in which fit-for-purpose targets and indicators play a role, but do not overtake or restrict the broader aims of advancing social, political, and gender justice.

Five Lessons for Advancing Maternal Health Rights in an Age of Neoliberal Globalization and Conservative Backlash.

After considerable progress in recent decades, maternal mortality and morbidity (MMM) either stagnated or worsened in most regions of the globe between 2016 and 2020. The world should be outraged given that we have known the key interventions necessary for preventing MMM for over three-quarters of a century. Since the 1990s, human rights advocacy on MMM has gained crucial ground, demonstrating that entitlements related to maternal health are judicially enforceable and delineating rights-based approaches to health in the context of MMM. Nonetheless, evident retrogressions, coupled with ballooning social inequalities, redoubled austerity post-pandemic, and a conservative populist backlash against reproductive rights, underscore the steep challenges we face. This paper offers five lessons gleaned from what we have achieved during the past 30 years of human rights advocacy on maternal health, and where we have fallen short: (1) maternal health is not a technical challenge alone and is inseparable from reproductive justice; (2) reproductive justice requires strengthening health system infrastructures; (3) we must center the political economy of global health in our advocacy, not just national policies; (4) litigation is part of a larger advocacy toolkit, not a go-it-alone strategy; and (5) we must use metrics that tell us why women are dying and what to do.

Step by Step in Argentina: Putting Abortion Rights into Practice.

In December of 2020, the Argentine Congress legalized abortion through 14 weeks, vastly increasing access to abortion care in the country. The law's passage followed years of advocacy for abortion rights in Argentina - including mass public and civil society mobilization, vocal support from an established pool of abortion providers who offered abortion services under specific legal exceptions prior to the new law, and the growth of community groups such as the Socorristas en Red who provide support for people to self-manage abortions. Aided by ample political will, the number of health facilities offering services increased substantially after the law was passed, and the public visibility around the law has helped assure people seeking abortion that it is their right. Proyecto mirar is an initiative focused on both gathering and using qualitative and quantitative data to inform stakeholders about the progress and obstacles of the law's implementation. In this review, we present an overall summary of the first two years of implementation of the abortion law in Argentina based on proyecto mirar data and contextualized through the historical processes that have contributed to the law's passage and application. While we see increases in abortion services and improved public perception around abortion rights, inequities in access and quality of care persist throughout the country. Specifically, providers in some regions are well trained, while others create obstacles to access, and in some regions health services provide high quality abortion care whereas others provide substandard care. To be sure, the implementation of public policies does not happen overnight; it requires government support and backing to tackle obstacles and solve implementation problems. Our findings suggest that when new abortion laws are passed, they must be supported by civil society and government leaders to ensure that associated policies are well crafted and monitored to ensure successful implementation.

Shades of dignity: exploring the demands of equality in applying human rights frameworks to health.

The foundational princple of human rights is that all human beings are equal in rights, dignity, and worth. Yet we live in a world ravaged by social inequalities both within and between countries, which have profound implications for the distribution of population health as well as the unequal enjoyment of economic and social rights and of human rights generally. It is far from clear that we have a consensus in the human rights community about which inequalities in health constitute inequities or how egalitarian a society must be to conform to the requirements of a social order in which all human rights can be realized. Further, the conversations in the world of human rights have largely been divorced from those in the worlds of development and public health. In this article, I attempt to bring those two conversations together. I first set out how concepts of formal and substantive equality and non-discrimination are defined under international law and might be applied in practice to questions we face in public health today. I argue that the application of these concepts is far from formulaic; interpretations of equality and non-discrimination necessarily reflect deeply held understandings about justice, power, and how we are the same and different from one another. I then explore how far a human rights framework can guide us in terms of some of these underlying questions in health and development polity, particularly in relation to how much priority should be given to the worst off in society, what kind of equality we should be seeking from a human rights perspective, and how we should evaluate who is worst off in terms of health. In conclusion, I argue that the great power of applying a human rights framework to health lies in denaturalizing the inequalities that pervade our societies and our world and in establishing that all people--by virtue of being human--have both a claim for redress when they are treated unfairly and a right to participate in determining what equity and equality require in a given context.

Suffering and powerlessness: the significance of promoting participation in rights-based approaches to health.

In a rights framework, participation is inextricably related to power. Through effective participation, we can challenge political and other forms of exclusion that prevent people from having power over the decisions and processes that affect their lives and health. Yet concepts of power are as contested as notions of participation. Thus, I argue here that, far from there being a formula for what participation means in a rights-based approach to health, the way in which we conceptualize the role of participation is closely linked to how we understand power and, in turn, the purpose and meaning of human rights themselves. I outline three ways of thinking about domination and participation-as-empowerment. In a liberal understanding of how power operates, there is an overarching concern for ensuring processes of participation that enable competing groups to express their voices on the proverbial level playing field, so that no one group may impose its will on the others. Critics of this approach assert that it ignores the power relations in which participatory processes are embedded, which determine which of the issues that affect health get decided--and which issues are never brought to the table because they are systematically blocked. If a second dimension of power entails deciding what gets decided, participatory approaches need to challenge the definition of what is "up for contention," or they risk merely legitimating social control. A third dimension of power entails securing compliance from oppressed groups by shaping their perceptions of their own interests. A human rights-based approach concerned with the effects of this form of domination on people's health calls for developing critical consciousness before there can be any truly "empowering" participation. I conclude by arguing that much is at stake in defining participation in a human rights framework to health, because in defining what we are calling for, we will determine how relevant human rights are to the daily struggles of people around the world for well-being.