Media center

Texas judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, has suspended the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) approval of the abortion pill Mifepristone in a horror move for abortion access across the United States. The decision will result in a nationwide ban on Mifepristone in seven days, with the FDA given one week to appeal the ruling. While the ban also affected access in states that have secured abortion post-Roe v Wade, a conflicting ruling from Judge Thomas O. Rice from a federal court in Washington state ordered the FDA to maintain access to Mifepristone in 17 democratic states and Colombia District – effectively putting access to the pill into limbo. Mifepristone, which has been FDA-approved for more than 22 years and has a safety record of over 99%[i], is taken alongside the drug Misoprostol during medical abortion procedures. Since then, it has been used by over 5 million[ii] Americans and was used in more than half of abortions nationwide last year. While Misoprostol can be used alone in medical abortion, people should have access to the full spectrum of abortion care options. Mifepristone is also used in the medical management of miscarriage and second and third-trimester pregnancies when the fetus has died before birth. While the ruling does not prohibit the FDA from making a new authorization for Mifepristone, this will likely take many months. Severe disruption to abortion care services, healthcare services and supply chain issues are expected as healthcare providers and pharmacies grapple with legality, stock, retraining and reeducation. Beth Schlachter, Director of Global Advocacy for the International Planned Parenthood Federation, said: "For 22 years, Mifepristone has been safely used in medical abortion care across the U.S., allowing healthcare providers to deliver safe, practical and discreet care to people who have chosen to end their pregnancies, regardless of their economic status or ability to travel. "In one fell swoop, anti-abortion extremists have once again stripped people of their rights in another blow to liberty. This horror ruling based on junk science, wilful distortion of fact and extreme political agendas will profoundly affect the lives of millions of people already struggling to access the care they need, especially in states where abortion is already banned." Anti-abortion extremists deliberately filed the case against the approval of Mifepristone in the Amarillo division of the Northern District of Texas — a single-judge division where cases are automatically assigned to Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a conservative judge appointed by former President Trump. The group claim that: "the statutory basis on which the FDA's approval of Mifepristone was issued 22 years ago is invalid" - an assertion both the Government Accountability Office and FDA have previously investigated and put to rest "an 1873 vice law that made it illegal to send "obscene, lewd or lascivious" material through the mail applies to abortion pills" - federal courts have consistently ruled it doesn't apply to lawful abortions "the drug's original approval wasn't supported by evidence of safety and efficacy" — a claim that medical and policy experts have continuously discredited Beth Schlachter, added: "The implementation of a national ban on Mifepristone via a state court debunks one of the principal anti-abortion arguments in the Roe v Wade case  - that the ruling curtailed state freedom and that abortion rights should be defined on a state-by-state basis. "This weaponization of federal courts by anti-abortion extremists proves just how dangerous the overturning of Roe v Wade is for everyday Americans, whose access to healthcare now lies in the hands of fanatical religious extremists determined to disrupt, harass and deceive until they end access to abortion care and long-held sexual and reproductive rights for good." The International Planned Parenthood Federation's local partner, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, will continue to provide abortion care where safe and legal to do so. Those seeking medical abortion can also access care via AidAccess and WomenonWeb. At least two abortion networks, Trust Women and Whole Womans Health, have also announced that they will not immediately stop prescribing Mifepristone and will await a directive from the FDA – a move known as a conscientious provision which refers to providers who continue to provide care despite the legal parameters.   Alongside its partner and other reproductive health organizations, IPPF will keep fighting for access to abortion care, freedom from stigma and freedom from criminalization until everyone, everywhere, is free to make choices about their sexuality and well-being. [i] https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/42/8a/428ab2ad-3798-4e3d-8a9f-213203f0af65/191011-the-facts-on-mifepristone-d01.pdf [ii] Ibid For media enquiries, please contact Karmen Ivey at [email protected] or [email protected]   About the International Planned Parenthood Federation The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is a global service provider and advocate of sexual and reproductive health and rights for all.  For 70 years, IPPF, through its 118 Member Associations and seven partners, has delivered high-quality sexual and reproductive healthcare and helped advance sexual rights, especially for people with intersectional and diverse needs that are currently unmet. Our Member Associations and partners are independent organizations that are locally owned, which means the support and care they provide is informed by local expertise and context. We advocate for a world where people have the information they need to make informed decisions about their sexual health and bodies. We stand up and fight for sexual and reproductive rights and against those who seek to deny people their human right to bodily autonomy and freedom. We deliver care that is rooted in rights, respect, and dignity - no matter what.  

For the first time, the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) has adopted Agreed Conclusions on the theme of Innovation and technological change, and education in the digital age for achieving gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls. IPPF actively engaged in the process by providing technical input and raising awareness about the interlinkages between SRHR, digital technologies, gender equality, and the empowerment and human rights of all women and girls. IPPF was well represented at the Commission with the following member associations actively involved in advocacy efforts and included on national delegations: the Danish Family Planning Association (DFPA), Rutgers (Netherlands), Profamilia Colombia, and RFSU (the Swedish Association for Sexuality Education). This was the Commission’s first in-person convening since 2019. During the global Covid-19 pandemic, civil society space was limited at the CSW as the sessions were conducted entirely online or only open to a limited number of civil society organizations (CSOs). This year’s session therefore constituted the first time since the beginning of the pandemic that many CSOs could meet and mobilize in person; the session welcomed a record number of 8000 participants to CSW. The experience and impact of the Covid-19 pandemic highlights the importance of ensuring transparency and adequate access to civil society as well as the need to ensure that restrictions that were enforced under Covid-19 do not hamper access for CSOs going forward.   Geopolitical landscape The negotiations were led by the Ambassador of Argentina and culminated in over weeks of negotiations between Member States on this new and important theme. For the first time, the facilitator and the Bureau decided to launch negotiations with some paragraphs containing previously agreed language “closed” so delegates could instead focus on advancing language and normative standards that related to this new priority theme. The geopolitical backdrop to this year’s negotiations was, at times, extremely divided, with key issues such as the right to development, transfer of technology, sexual and reproductive health and rights, comprehensive sexuality education, multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, family-related language and the issue of foreign occupation causing political stalemate at times. Nonetheless, in the end, a consensus was reached, and strong Agreed Conclusions were adopted in the early morning hours on the last day of the Commission. Overall, gains were made on the important and ever-evolving area of technology, innovation, education and gender equality.  Sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights IPPF welcomes strong references to sexual and reproductive health (SRH), health care-services, and sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights: in particular, preambular paragraphs 67, 69 and operative paragraphs (0), (p), and (ll). IPPF welcomes the CSW’s recognition of the important role of digital health, including digital health technologies, digital tools, telemedicine, and mobile health, to ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information, and education. We also welcome that CSW recognises the need to ensure that such technologies and tools are developed in consultation with women and, as appropriate, girls, and that these technologies are science and evidence-based while protecting personal information, including health information and doctor-patient confidentiality, and prioritize consent and informed decision-making (1). Member States were able to agree on a new operative paragraph on SRH-care services which constitutes a gain beyond what was achieved last year. Digital technologies and new innovations are already having an impact on SRHR and education, for example, by the provision of sexuality education, online information, and the use of telemedicine and apps to provide people with counselling and SRH-care. The consensus reached at this year’s Commission reflects the broad-based support of Member States to take steps to address the opportunities and challenges that arise in the context of SRH and innovation, technological change, and education. Adolescents  We also welcome the Agreed Conclusion’s strong references to adolescents, including preambular paragraph 19, which is a standalone paragraph that discusses the disproportionate discrimination and violence that adolescents face and that occur through or are amplified by the use of technology. We also welcome references to adolescents in PP53, PP66, (ll), (uu), and (ee), including pregnant adolescents, young mothers, and single mothers to enable them to continue and complete their education and provide catch-up and literacy, including digital literacy. Multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination  We regret that references to multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination were contested by some delegations, especially given the relevance to this year’s theme. It is well documented that women, adolescents, and girls facing multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination (MIFD) are more likely to face discrimination and violence through or amplified by technology. They also lack access to technological opportunities and advancements. We regret that the Agreed Conclusions do not have a standalone paragraph linking the priority theme to MIFD, which also constitutes a setback from last year’s agreement, where there were three references to MIFD, as opposed to this year’s text which only includes two.  Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) The text includes a standalone paragraph on comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) in operative paragraph (ll), which is language that has previously been adopted at the Commission. Though there were attempts to build on this language and advance on normative standards relating to CSE, these proposals were ultimately dropped at a late hour due to the inability to reach consensus on suggested new language. We regret that discussions stalled on CSE, as this is an area that has been well documented by UN agencies as an effective preventative and evidence-based intervention that can improve the health, well-being, and lives of young people, as well as prevent the incidence of gender-based violence and sexually transmitted infections. This is especially unfortunate, given this year’s priority theme and the focus on education.  Technology-facilitated gender-based violence The discussions on the phenomenon of technology-facilitated gender-based violence became politically contested, with some delegations insisting that this terminology constituted a new technical term, requiring a comprehensive definition were it to be referenced in the text. It was, therefore not possible to have a reference to the term in the text even though the phenomenon was well described and prioritized therein. In this regard, we welcome the numerous references to gender-based violence and particularly the recognition that girls are often at greater risk of being exposed to and experience various forms of discrimination and gender-based violence and harmful practices, including through the use of technology and social media (2). Furthermore, we welcome references to ‘non-consenual’ in preambular paragraph 56 and operative paragraph (uuu), as this concerns critical violations of rights and freedoms that women, adolescents, and girls are subject to. These well-documented abuses can be exacerbated by technology; in this regard, the principle of non-consensual is critical to acknowledging the autonomy of women, adolescents, and girls in decisions affecting their sexual, reproductive, and intimate lives.  Right to privacy and personal data Greater need for practices and laws that guarantee the protection of sensitive personal and health data has increased alongside the rise of digital technologies. We therefore welcome the Commission’s recognition that women - and particularly girls - often do not and/or cannot provide their free, explicit, and informed consent to the collection, processing, use, storage, or sale of their personal data (3). We also welcome the Commission’s emphasis on the need to address the digital divide for migrant women and girls and ensure their online connectivity and equitable access to services while upholding the protection of personal data and their right to privacy (4). Finally, we also welcome that the Commission underscores the importance of applying standards for the collection, use, and sharing of data, retention, archiving, and deletion to ensure the protection of women’s and girls’ personal data and to strengthen their ownership of their own personal data (5). Human rights references We welcome the strong references to the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all women and girls in the text. In particular, we welcome acknowledgement of the risks and opportunities that the evolving nature of technology brings in terms of realizing the human rights of women, adolescents, girls, and other marginalized groups and the action required by Member States and relevant stakeholders to mitigate against risks and protect, respect, and fulfil the human rights of all women and girls. This year’s Agreed Conclusions has almost double as many references relating to the human rights of women and girls. This constitutes a huge advancement and is testament to the resounding cross-regional support for upholding the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all women and girls.  Putting the Agreed Conclusions into practice Despite intensive and, at times, difficult political deliberations around key issues, the adoption of Agreed Conclusions signals the strong cross-regional support for the mandate of the Commission and its priority theme. It also reflects cross-regional support for key issues, including SRHR, human rights, preventing, addressing and eliminating gender-based violence, especially gender-based violence occurring and being amplified through technology. The importance and success of the Agreed Conclusions lie in its implementation at the national level. IPPF and its member associations are well placed as a locally owned, global Federation to work to ensure the implementation of the Agreed Conclusions at national, regional, and global levels. This will ultimately and most importantly benefit the lives of women, adolescents, girls and other marginalized groups in the communities where they live.  (1) PP69 (2) PP52 (3) PP39 (4) PP82 (5) OP qqq  Photo Credit: UN Women/Ryan Brown For media enquiries, please contact Karmen Ivey on [email protected] or [email protected]   About the International Planned Parenthood Federation The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is a global service provider and advocate of sexual and reproductive health and rights for all.   For 70 years, IPPF, through its 108 Member Associations and 7 partners, has delivered high-quality sexual and reproductive healthcare and helped advance sexual rights, especially for people with intersectional and diverse needs that are currently unmet. Our Member Associations and partners are independent organizations that are locally owned, which means the support and care they provide is informed by local expertise and context. We advocate for a world where people are provided with the information they need to make informed decisions about their sexual health and bodies. We stand up and fight for sexual and reproductive rights and against those who seek to deny people their human right to bodily autonomy and freedom. We deliver care that is rooted in rights, respect, and dignity - no matter what.