|
The
United Nations Children’s Fund
Women or Children First?
IslamOnline.net
here republishes the introduction and conclusion of an important
detailed study on UNICEF that was published in 2003. With the
permission of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-Fam).
Click
here to read the complete study.
Introduction
 |
|
Under Carol Bellamy, UNICEF has added controversial programs (Source: UNICEF). |
|
For
decades, the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has enjoyed perhaps the
finest reputation of any large international organization. UNICEF
earned this reputation through an earnest, unwavering commitment to
improve the health and lives of as many children as possible.
Unfortunately, this reputation is increasingly at risk, and it is at
risk because powerful forces both within the organization and within
the larger international community have demanded that UNICEF change,
that it alter its traditional child survival programs and that it
add new and ever-more controversial programs, that it consciously
and consistently embrace a newly dominant ideology in all that it
does—the ideology of radical feminism. Radical feminism[1]
has come to define the current UNICEF, even to the possible
detriment of UNICEF’s original mandate to help children. The story
of UNICEF is a cautionary tale, a tale of how difficult it is for
international organizations to retain autonomy, to retain control
over their own policies, to remain free from the influence of this
powerful ideology. UNICEF still saves many children’s lives, but a
reformation of UNICEF programming will be necessary for UNICEF to
perform as much good as possible. A reformation in programming—and
perhaps personnel—will be necessary for UNICEF to regain its
reputation as the world’s pre-eminent child-care organization.
Conclusion,
the Future of UNICEF
UNICEF’s
representative from
Sweden
said that one of the greatest needs of the world’s
children is universal access to sexual health care services. |
|
It
has now become clear that UNICEF does not operate in a vacuum; it is
not free from the influence of other UN organizations, its donor
nations and, most especially, its Executive Board. And, since many
of the nations on the Executive Board, especially the European
nations, have embraced the notion that adolescents should possess
complete sexual autonomy, as well as the reproductive services
necessary to exercise that autonomy, we should expect UNICEF to
reflect these views in its programming. In fact, at the same meeting
in which the
US
representative declared that UNICEF was silent about the role of
fathers and the promotion of abstinence, a meeting held in 2001, the
representative from
Denmark
called for UNICEF to place even more emphasis on adolescents’
reproductive and sexual rights. The representative from
Sweden
called for UNICEF to accelerate its integration with UNFPA, stating
that one of the greatest needs of the world’s children is
universal access to reproductive and sexual health care services.[2]
It
is obvious that children—how they should be reared, the role of
parents, the education and services children should receive—will
remain a battleground on the international scene. It is also obvious
that, because of this ideological strife, Jim Grant’s vision of
UNICEF, an agency able to spark the imagination of the entire world,
may continue to recede into memory.
Recommendations
To
avoid this future, it will be necessary for donors, both individuals
and nations, to demand changes at UNICEF. Donor nations, most
especially the
United States
, must take a closer look at how their money is being spent by
UNICEF. These donor nations must demand greater transparency in
UNICEF spending, especially in controversial matters regarding
reproductive health care services and sexual education programs.
Donor nations should also initiate full investigations of the
various, serious charges raised in this study. In the
United States
, an investigation should take the form of congressional hearings.
Donor nations should also work to ensure that the next generation of
UNICEF’s top leadership reflects the principles and priorities of
former Executive Director Jim Grant. Finally, parents whose children
are called upon to raise funds for UNICEF, should tell their
children to desist until these fundamental changes have been
achieved.
Specifically:
UNICEF
should renounce the CEDAW
Compliance Committee as a source of policy guidance. |
|
•
UNICEF should seek a balance between programming for girls and
programming for boys; problems faced specifically by boys should
garner as much attention at UNICEF as problems faced by girls.
•
UNICEF should not spend resources on controversial efforts to
re-educate boys and men according to feminist gender theory.
•
UNICEF should abandon the “life-cycle” approach to programming,
which has been used as a justification for UNICEF to create feminist
programs for women. Many international agencies address women’s
issues; instead of adding to this effort, UNICEF should focus on its
original mandate, the care of children.
•
UNICEF should renounce the CEDAW Compliance Committee as a source of
policy guidance because of its insistent advocacy for abortion
rights and for other radical feminist causes.
•
UNICEF should publicly account for the activities of all UNICEF
health services, especially the funding or distribution of
contraceptives to adolescents.
•
UNICEF should disassociate itself with any organizations that
perform or promote abortion, such as International Planned
Parenthood Federation and Marie Stopes International.
•
UNICEF should renounce any documents previously endorsed by UNICEF
which call for abortion services or the legalization of abortion.
These
changes are necessary if UNICEF is truly to be an organization that
puts children—all children—first.
Douglas A. Sylva, Ph.D., is the Director of the International Organizations Research Group, as well as the Vice President of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. He earned a doctorate in political theory from Columbia University, where he was also an instructor. Dr. Sylva has been published widely, including in the
New York Times, the Washington Times, National Review Online, Insight,
and the National Catholic Register. He and his wife, Susan, are the parents of two children. You may contact the author by writing to family_under_attack@islam-online.net.
[1]
The term “radical feminist” is used to distinguish this
viewpoint from other varieties of feminism. Radical feminism is
intimately linked with such issues as the promotion of abortion on
demand as a human right and the understanding of gender as a
social construct.
[2]
Notes taken from UNICEF Executive Board, Second Regular Session
2001,
December 10, 2001
.
|
