US Pro-Lifers Fight to Explicitly Exclude Abortion-Related Groups From Global AIDS-Relief Program

Report: Battle Over Reauthorization of PEPFAR Centers on Abortion

A battle is currently taking place in Congress over the reauthorization of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), with the main point of contention being whether the program supports abortions overseas.

Pro-Life Concerns

Pro-life Representative Chris Smith, previously a prime sponsor of PEPFAR, has stated that he opposes the program’s reauthorization unless it excludes groups that provide, promote, or lobby for abortion. Smith argues that the Biden administration’s alleged inclusion of abortion within the program poses an existential threat to the children of Africa.

Smith points to language in the Biden administration’s 2022 PEPFAR action plan, “Reimagining PEPFAR’s Strategic Direction,” which calls for integrating HIV programming into public health systems and strengthening coordination with other U.S. government global health and development programs, including sexual and reproductive health and rights.

Smith argues that the Biden administration uses the terms “sexual and reproductive health and rights” to include abortion, citing administration guidance and executive orders where the definitions include abortion.

Pro-Life Protections

Pro-life groups are calling for language that would bar organizations providing and promoting abortion from receiving U.S. taxpayer dollars. This was previously a part of the Reagan-era Mexico City Policy, which was expanded under the Trump administration and renamed the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance Policy.

In May, a coalition of 31 pro-life organizations wrote to the heads of the House and Senate Foreign Relations Committees, asking for Mexico City Policy language to be added to PEPFAR to prevent taxpayer funds from promoting a radical sexual and reproductive health agenda.

Abortion Provision and Promotion

The Biden administration has stated that PEPFAR does not provide support for abortion services. However, Representative Smith argues that abortion groups still receive significant funding through PEPFAR, even if that money is not specifically used for abortions.

Smith provided examples of recipients of PEPFAR funding, such as the Population Services Institute (PSI), VillageReach, and Pathfinder International, which he claims provide and promote abortion services.

Push for Pro-Life Protections

Representative Smith supports a fiscal year 2024 appropriations bill that would extend PEPFAR through 2024 with full pro-life protections. Bishop Michael Burbidge and other faith leaders have also urged Congress to include pro-life language in the PEPFAR reauthorization.

White House Stance

The White House has not responded to claims of abortion promotion and provision by PEPFAR grant recipients. An anonymous senior White House official stated that abortion is not being injected into PEPFAR and that the Mexico City Policy inhibits their ability to confront health challenges.

Addressing Pushback

Former Senator Rick Santorum suggests a clean extension of PEPFAR for five years may be the best outcome given the current political landscape. However, critics argue that funding going to organizations for specific purposes still frees up money for other uses, such as abortion.

Concerns have also been raised by faith leaders in African countries receiving aid, who argue that the funding may support family planning and reproductive health practices that violate their core beliefs.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Relevant to the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 5: Gender Equality
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 3.3: By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and neglected tropical diseases and combat hepatitis, water-borne diseases, and other communicable diseases.
• SDG 5.6: Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences.
• SDG 17.16: Enhance the global partnership for sustainable development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology, and financial resources to support the achievement of the sustainable development goals in all countries.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator for SDG 3.3: Number of new HIV infections per 1,000 uninfected population, by sex, age, and key populations.
• Indicator for SDG 5.6: Proportion of women aged 15-49 years who make their own informed decisions regarding sexual relations, contraceptive use, and reproductive health care.
• Indicator for SDG 17.16: Amount of United States foreign aid allocated to programs supporting the achievement of the sustainable development goals.

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: ncregister.com

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.