ICRH, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016 Feb 11;5(5):325-7. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2016.16.
Ivanova et al explored how vulnerable groups and principles of human rights are incorporated into national sexual and reproductive health (SRH) policies in 4 countries. They adapted the EquiFrame of Amin and colleagues of 2011, to SRH vulnerable groups which we believe could now be used for analysis of national SRH polices beyond those 4 countries. Although we fully agree with the authors' two main findings that vulnerable groups and human rights' principles are not sufficiently integrated in SRH policies nor granted the possibility to participate in the process of development in those four countries, we do believe that these shortcomings are not limited to those countries only nor to the identified vulnerable groups either. We are convinced that the issue of SRH as such is still framed within a very limited logic for all with vulnerable groups being perceived as an extra threat or an extra burden.
伊万诺娃等人探讨了脆弱群体和人权原则如何纳入 4 个国家的国家性健康和生殖健康政策。他们根据 Amin 和同事在 2011 年制定的 EquiFrame 框架,将其适用于性健康和生殖健康脆弱群体,我们认为,现在可以将其用于分析这 4 个国家以外的国家性健康和生殖健康政策。尽管我们完全同意作者的两个主要发现,即脆弱群体和人权原则没有充分纳入性健康和生殖健康政策,也没有赋予他们参与这些国家政策制定过程的可能性,但我们确实认为,这些缺陷不仅限于这 4 个国家,也不限于确定的脆弱群体。我们深信,性健康和生殖健康问题本身仍然受到非常有限的逻辑的限制,所有脆弱群体都被视为额外的威胁或额外的负担。