By Mario Osava
RIO DE JANEIRO, Jul 5 2022 – A campaign against hunger, a problem that affects 15.5 percent of the Brazilian population, seeks to mobilize society once again in search of urgent solutions, inspired by a mass movement that took off in the country in 1993.

“Now it’s more difficult, hunger has spread throughout the country, in cities where there was none, it has expanded,” said Rodrigo Afonso, executive director of Citizen Action, one of the social organizations spearheading the campaign.

“Besides, society is anesthetized with so many tragedies, exhausted after two years of the COVID-19 pandemic, so many losses,” he lamented in an interview with IPS.”Now it’s more difficult, hunger has spread throughout the country, in cities where there was none, it has expanded.” — Rodrigo Afonso

And we cannot count on the current government, which in addition to deactivating policies that had been strengthening food security, adopted negative measures, the activist added, saying that for now they are looking towards civil society and companies.

“Brazil feeds one billion people in the world, we provide food security for one-sixth of the world’s population,” President Jair Bolsonaro exaggerated in his speech at the Summit of the Americas on Jun. 10 in Los Angeles, California.

But according to Brazilian agricultural researchers, who made a simple calculation based on the country’s growing grain production, Brazil’s food exports feed 800 million people.

If Brazil accounts for 10 percent of the world’s grain production, about 270 million tons this year, according to the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply, then it feeds 10 percent of humanity.

The country is the world’s largest producer of soybeans, coffee and sugar, as well as the largest exporter of meat.

A green sea of soy is the landscape in vast areas of Brazil, especially in the midwest and southern regions of the country. They are held up as the “success” of Brazilian agriculture, which, according to President Jair Bolsonaro, feeds one billion people around the world. But paradoxically, 33.1 million Brazilians suffer from hunger. CREDIT: Mario Osava/IPS

Food for other countries, shortages at home

But the production boasted of by political leaders and large agricultural producers is basically destined for export and livestock feed. Brazilians consume only a small portion of the corn and an even smaller portion of the soybeans the country produces – most of it is exported or used for animal feed.

At the same time, Brazil is a net importer of wheat and beans, key products in the diet of the country’s inhabitants. And the production of rice, another staple, just barely meets domestic demand.

Bolsonaro and his far-right government, closely allied with export agriculture, seek to defend a sector that faces international criticism, due to its association with deforestation in the Amazon rainforest, harassment and mistreatment of indigenous peoples and the overuse of agrochemicals.

The hunger faced by 33.1 million Brazilians – 15.5 percent of the population – as reported by the non-governmental Brazilian Network for Research on Food and Nutritional Sovereignty and Security (Penssan), further tarnishes the image of this country, a major food producer.

Penssan, headed by researchers from universities and other public institutions, but open to all interested parties, released its second National Survey on Food Insecurity in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Jun. 8.

The study based on data collected between November 2021 and April 2022 pointed to a 73 percent increase over the 19.1 million hungry people reported in the first edition, published in late 2020.

In other words, in just over a year of pandemic, the number of people suffering from severe food insecurity or frequent food deprivation increased by 14 million: from nine to 15.5 percent of the Brazilian population, today estimated at 214 million.

The crisis especially affects people in the North and Northeast (the poorest regions), blacks, families headed by women and with children under 10 years of age, and rural and local populations that also suffer from water insecurity. Inequalities have intensified.

Wearing a T-shirt reading “Hunger, the greatest violence”, Herbert de Souza, Betinho (C), is honored as a symbol of the Brazilian fight against hunger. He led a massive campaign starting in 1993 and unleashed a process that allowed Brazil to be removed from the FAO hunger map in 2014. But the country returned to the map in 2018 and hunger worsened with the pandemic and the government of far-right President Jair Bolsonaro in 2021. CREDIT: Facebook

Reviving the movement against hunger

To face this new emergency situation, Citizen Action called a National Meeting against Hunger, which brought together representatives of social movements, non-governmental organizations and food security councils that operate in the Brazilian states, from Jun. 20 to 23 in Rio de Janeiro.

The meeting approved a letter addressed to the public with a proposal for ten priority measures, ranging from an increase in the national minimum wage to a fair tax reform, the resumption of agrarian reform and the demarcation of indigenous lands, interrupted under the current government, and the restoration of food security policies also abolished under the Bolsonaro administration.

These demands will serve as the basis for the new anti-hunger campaign that will be officially launched in the coming weeks, Afonso announced.

The present outlook is due to the economic crisis Brazil has been suffering since 2015 and the pandemic, aggravated as “a product of recent government decisions, which dismantled food security policies and imposed new contrary measures,” the executive director of Citizen Action told IPS.

The Bolsonaro administration has not raised the minimum wage, for example, merely adjusting it each year to keep up with the official inflation rate. The current inflation rate of 11.73 percent accumulated in the 12 months up to May reduces the purchasing power of the minimum wage month by month.

The minimum wage, set at 1,212 reais (233 dollars) a month for this year, is no longer enough to cover the cost of the basic basket of food and hygiene products for a family of four in the southern city of São Paulo, which currently costs 1,226 reais, according to the Inter-Union Department of Statistics and Socioeconomic Studies.

Bolsonaro replaced the Bolsa Familia program with Auxilio Brasil, a stipend of 400 reais (77 dollars) – double the previous amount – to 18 million families, in an attempt to win votes among the poor, a sector in which he is highly unpopular according to polls for the October presidential elections.

But there are “almost three million very poor families” still excluded from the program, who are going hungry, Afonso stressed.

Citizen Action is the non-governmental organization heir to the massive movement unleashed in 1993 by sociologist Herbert de Souza, known as Betinho, which awakened the public to the extent of hunger in the country and mobilized the solidarity of millions of people in municipal, factory, school, neighborhood and community committees.

The campaign, called Citizen Action against Hunger and Poverty and for Life, triggered a process that culminated in the creation of a national food security system, governmental but with broad participation by society in councils at the national, state and municipal levels.

“We still have regional and local committees in all 26 Brazilian states” seeking to collect food donations and mobilize the population to prioritize the fight against hunger, Afonso said.

Many companies support the campaign that will also try to mobilize political leaders, delivering the letter approved at the Meeting against Hunger to all presidential candidates in the October elections, announced the activist, confident in a new awakening of society to the problem, despite the current adverse circumstances.

By Carel du Marchie Sarvaas
BRUSSELS, Jul 5 2022 – The ongoing discussions at the World Health Organization (WHO) around a new, landmark ‘pandemic prevention treaty’ shows that the world is starting to act on the lessons it learned from the COVID-19 pandemic.

In fact, countries have already taken the first steps towards amending the International Health Regulations that govern the reporting and national responses to emerging pandemics, which were subsequently found to fall short during the initial outbreak of COVID-19.

Yet, with countries set to discuss a working draft of the pandemic prevention treaty in August, time is increasingly of the essence to fully codify these learnings if we are to prevent future zoonotic disease outbreaks. The recent monkeypox outbreak shows that the world can ill afford to stall when building its defences to emerging diseases.

And at the same time, new vector-borne health threats – whether they originate in humans or animals – are emerging across the world, particularly as climate change creates new opportunities for disruptive outbreaks in previously less impacted regions of the world.

Preventing the next pandemic is clearly no straight-forward task. This is why a ‘One Health’ approach, one which recognizes the interconnectivity of environmental, human, and animal health, offers us the greatest chance of shoring up global defences against emerging diseases, of which an estimated 70 per cent originate from wild animals. Clearly, a ‘One Health’ approach should be the foundation of global efforts to prevent the next pandemic.

To begin with, countries should focus their efforts to create a new One Health Preparedness Unit, which will bolster and unify international preparations against emerging disease outbreaks. Presently, government disease detection and surveillance programs are too often overstretched and under-resourced, leaving countries – and by extension, the global community – unprepared for new threats.

In this context, a new international One Health Preparedness Unit could bring together existing resources, such as the World Animal Health Information System (WAHIS), USAID’s PREDICT project for boosting pandemic preparedness, or the environmental health monitoring undertaken by non-profits like the EcoHealth Alliance, in the most effective and efficient way, while also having a greater capability to undertake wargame-style planning. In doing so, the international community could better map out potential disease threats and reach collective decisions on how best to respond when they emerge.

Secondly, countries could also prioritize new rules and protocols to help products get to market faster to address acute and ongoing crises as part of any draft agreement. The COVID-19 pandemic showed that fast-tracking critical health tools, like vaccines, can save lives and help respond more rapidly to emerging pandemics.

Streamlining regulatory approval could dramatically reduce the amount of time it takes for vaccines to make their way into the hands of veterinarians, which, in turn, will build the resistance of pets and livestock to disease outbreaks.

As it stands, any tweaks to the existing stock of animal vaccines requires new safety assessments, which means it may take months or years to respond to an emerging disease variant. Allowing previous safety assessments to be used to support vaccines for new strains would streamline this process, lowering the barriers to vaccinating animals and reducing the public health risk in the case of zoonotic disease.

Finally, governments should also agree to fund and adopt new policies that expand global access to preventative animal health tools as part of any future pandemic prevention treaty. Prevention of diseases is always better than cure, yet the defences required to prevent the spill-over of zoonotic diseases from animals is uneven around the world.

More investment in preventative measures, particularly biosecurity on farms but also diagnostic technologies which can detect changes in health before serious, observable symptoms emerge, can not only reduce the frequency, but also the severity, of disease outbreaks, as it already has in many developed countries.

Europe, for instance, has not seen the emergence of a major zoonotic disease since Q Fever more than a decade ago, while the UK reduced salmonella outbreaks by 87 per cent from their 1992 peak – thanks to poultry vaccination.

The lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic are clear: the world can no longer afford to treat the threats facing the health of humans and animals, as well as the environment at large, as distinct.

To ensure the world is fully prepared to face the next pandemic, the interconnected principles of a ‘One Health’ approach should be at the core of any future pandemic prevention treaty.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

Excerpt:

The writer is executive director of HealthforAnimals, the global animal health association

 
World Zoonoses Day, which will be commemorated on July 6, celebrates the success of the first vaccine which was created against the zoonotic disease ‘rabies’. It was developed by Louis Pasteur, a French biologist on 6 July, 1885.

By Anis Chowdhury and Jomo Kwame Sundaram
SYDNEY and KUALA LUMPUR, Jul 5 2022 – Long seen as means to seek advantage on the pretext of providing mutual benefit, free trade agreements (FTAs) may increasingly be used as economic weapons in the emerging new Cold War.

Pivot to Asia, containing China
In November 2009, President Obama observed, “in an inter-connected world, power does not need to be a zero-sum game… the United States does not seek to contain China”.

Anis Chowdhury

But Obama soon changed course with his ‘pivot to Asia’, first announced in November 2011. After his re-election in 2012, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) became the economic centrepiece of the new US strategy to check China’s growth and technological progress.

His US Trade Representative (USTR) claimed the TPP was based on principles the US champions, such as protecting intellectual property (IP) and human rights. While claiming all who accept its principles would be welcome to join, China was conspicuously not among countries negotiating the TPP.

For Washington, this new rivalry with China involves strengthened US alliances with Japan, South Korea and Australia. In October 2011, the US Congress ratified the Korea-US (KORUS) FTA.

With the military and economic containment of China central to US security strategy, the TPP was concluded in 2015. Obama emphasized, “TPP allows America – and not countries like China – to write the rules of the road in the 21st century.”

Creating an “anyone but China club” was the US motive for establishing the TPP. But with changed public sentiment since Trump’s presidency, once Obama’s loyal Vice-President, now President Biden did not attempt to revive the TPP during his presidential campaign, or since.

Security alliances
“American prosperity and security are challenged by an economic competition playing out in a broader strategic context… We must work with like-minded allies and partners to ensure our principles prevail and the rules are enforced so that our economies prosper”, noted President Trump’s national security strategy.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Accordingly, the ‘Quad’ – Quadrilateral Security Dialogue group for maritime cooperation of the US, Australia, India and Japan, initiated after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami – has become a putative anti-China security arrangement.

By 2020, leaders of all four countries were more aligned in their concerns about China’s rise. In November 2020, navies of all four countries participated in their first joint military exercise in over a decade.

Meanwhile, under Shinzo Abe, Japan radically transformed its security policy. Abe has greatly expanded the Japan Self-Defence Forces’ role, mission and capabilities within and beyond the US-Japan alliance, especially in East Asia.

‘Defence cooperation’ has also been enhanced through country-to-country arrangements, such as the recent Japan-Australia Reciprocal Access Agreement as well as the earlier Japan-India Acquisition and Cross Servicing Agreement.

The US security profile in the region has been boosted by the AUKUS (Australia-UK-USA) alliance. Its clear intention is to enhance the US and its allies military presence in the Indo-Pacific, with the greatest ‘China focus’ of all regional security arrangements.

World hegemony
The US is also linking trade to its national security strategy, especially to contain China, in Africa and Latin America. As the USTR notes, “The Biden Administration is conducting a comprehensive review of U.S. trade policy toward China as part of its development of its overall China strategy”.

Her office also emphasizes, “Addressing the China challenge will require a comprehensive strategy and more systematic approach than the piecemeal approach of the recent past.”

Reflecting his Interim National Security Strategic Guidance, Biden emphasizes, “The United States must renew its enduring advantages…; modernize our military capabilities…; and revitalize America’s unmatched network of alliances and partnerships”. He notes “growing rivalry with China, Russia… reshaping every aspect of our lives”.

Biden insists his administration “will make sure that the rules of the international economy are not tilted against the United States. We will enforce existing trade rules and create new ones… This agenda will strengthen our enduring advantages, and allow us to prevail in strategic competition with China or any other nation”.

His administration announced a review of all Trump-era trade negotiations. Due to expire in 2025, President Clinton’s African Growth and Opportunity Act has offered enhanced US market access to qualifying African countries since 2000.

In April 2021, Secretary of State Antony Blinken confirmed US-Kenya FTA talks would resume. Observers believe the US-Kenya FTA, initiated by Trump in 2020, would help expand US ‘carrot and stick’ trade and security policies on the continent to counter China.

In the US ‘Monroe doctrine backyard’, six US FTAs already involve 12 Latin American and Caribbean countries. On 8 June, Biden announced a new regional economic partnership to counter China. His speech inaugurated a Summit of the Americas, criticized for omitting countries seen as friendly to China.

But Biden’s Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity is still seen as a work in progress. Not even offering FTAs’ standard tariff relief, the US anticipates initially focusing on “like-minded partners”. Although Biden hailed his “ground-breaking, integrated new approach”, responses suggest “waning” US influence.

Now, five years after Trump withdrew from the TPP, Biden has revived Obama’s China strategy with his own Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. Smug, he could not help but echo Obama’s TPP brag, “We’re writing the new rules”.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Stephen Akester and Daud Khan
ROME / LONDON, Jul 5 2022 – Over the last past several decades marine fish stocks worldwide have been under intense threat. There have been many high sounding declarations and agreements to reduce catch effort, to use more environmentally friendly fishing gear, to prevent illegal fishing and to impose “closed seasons” to allow stocks to recover.

However, these declarations have often been disregarded and ignored, particularly when it comes to the open oceans that are beyond national jurisdictions and are the common heritage of all mankind. And the main culprits have been the developed countries, with their large and sophisticated fishing fleets and super market consumers which instead of being cutback, continue to receive political support and public subsidies.

The story of the yellowfin tuna in the Indian Ocean well illustrates what has been happening.

Stephen Akester

The Yellowfin tuna is one of the most majestic fish in the oceans. It can grow to 1.8 meters in length and up to 150 kgs in weight living 10 to 14 years. It is a top predator and moves with a grace and elegance that is sheer poetry in movement.

As juveniles, Yellowfin normally hunt in surface waters in packs although, when they mature, they change their habits and tend to be solitary. They live in tropical and sub-tropical waters and there used to be large stocks in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans. But that was before Europeans, Asians and Americans discovered tinned tuna was cheap, and before the Japanese developed technology to very rapidly freeze freshly caught tuna for the Sashimi market in Japan where prize cuts can go for up to hundreds, if not thousands, of US$ per kilo.

During the 1970s and 80s the Europeans, Americans and the Japanese overfished the Atlantic tuna stocks. Their fishing fleets, mainly Spanish and French with several vessels flying “flags of convenience” – then moved to the Indian Ocean. These boats are floating factories with modern radar, sophisticated fishing gear and huge freezing capacity. Over time, more aggressive techniques are being introduced such as drifting Fish Attracting Devises (FADs) -small floating rafts that facilitate the growth of algae and seaweed and which in turn attract surface swimming tunas, skipjack and juvenile yellowfin. FADs, make it easier to increase catches and reduce costs but also are highly destructive as not only facilitate the catching of skipjack, the target species, but also young yellowfin tuna.

The overfishing of yellowfin tuna has triggered various attempts to reduce effort and introduce better management. Spearheading this effort in the Indian Ocean is the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), set up by FAO in 1996 to ensure, the conservation and optimum utilization of tuna stocks in the Indian Ocean. However, the IOTC is not well designed for handling the complexities and political pressures that stand in the way of equitable and sustainable fishing effort in the Indian Ocean. In particular, key aspects such as its membership and distribution of catch entitlement among countries, are deeply flawed.

Daud Khan

The Commission is “open to any state that has coasts within the Indian Ocean region” – this is fine and as it should be. But it is also open to states that have coasts on “adjacent seas”, “as well as any state that fishes for tuna in the Indian Ocean region.” This wording has allowed membership of the IOTC of non-coastal countries such as South Korea, China, Japan, Spain, France and the UK, as well as the EU.

Moreover, the division of allowable catch is based on how much each country fished in the past. This results in the poorer coastal states getting a small proportion of the allowable catch as compared to the richer countries that have been operating large, modern vessels capable of overfishing in the Indian Ocean since the mid-1980s. The outcome of this highly inequitable strategy is that 45% of the allowable catch of yellowfin tuna in the Indian Ocean is allocated to the EU. And the developing coastal countries have not only seen their national fisheries impacted by competition from the developed countries, they are not even entitled to any license or royalty fees from oceanic fisheries adjacent to their Exclusive Economic Zones.

Furthermore, the IOTC has been given a hamstrung decisions making process. Decisions are by consensus which prevents fundamental reforms such as limits on purse seiners or on drifting FADs. And when coastal state attempt is made to push matters to the vote, such as was the case for a proposal to ban drifting FADs, procedural issues prevent them for being adopted.

And so it goes on. Rich countries take the lion’s share of the allowable catch of yellowfin tuna, depriving the coastal states and their artisanal fishing communities of all but crumbs. They also systematically sabotage attempts to place restrictions on fishing and introduce more eco-friendly fishing practices.

As in many other areas, from climate change to the use of coal and the transition to green energy, there is much rhetoric from developed countries but efforts to change the system are not yet working.

Stephen Akester is an independent fisheries specialist working in Indian Ocean coastal countries for past 40 years……

Daud Khan works as consultant and advisor for various Governments and international agencies. He has degrees in Economics from the LSE and Oxford – where he was a Rhodes Scholar; and a degree in Environmental Management from the Imperial College of Science and Technology. He lives partly in Italy and partly in Pakistan.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Jul 5 2022 – Women’s rights groups fear a new legal provision in Poland requiring doctors to collect records on all pregnancies could create what they have described as a ‘pregnancy register’ to monitor whether women are having abortions.

Poland has some of Europe’s strictest abortion laws with terminations allowed in only two instances – if the woman’s health or life is at risk and if the pregnancy is the result of either rape or incest.

Until last year, abortions had also been allowed in cases where the foetus had congenital defects, but this exemption was removed following a legal challenge by members of the ruling right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) party, which some critics accuse of systematically suppressing women’s rights.

Rights groups and opposition MPs say that in light of the tightened abortion legislation, they are worried that the pregnancy data could be used in an unprecedented state surveillance campaign against women.

“A pregnancy register in a country with an almost complete ban on abortion is terrifying,” Agnieszka Dziemianowicz-Bąk, an MP for The Left (Lewica) political alliance in Poland, said on Twitter. “Even today, Polish women avoid getting pregnant out of fear that they will be forced to give birth in every situation. There are even more reasons to be scared now,” she added.

The new provision was approved by Health Minister Adam Niedzielski on June 3 and will come into effect in October when medical staff will begin collecting additional information from patients, including data on pregnancies. This will then be entered into the country’s central Medical Information System (SIM).

Critics question why this data is being collected now, and who will have access to it, pointing out that information about pregnancies is already available in medical records, while some Polish lawyers have claimed that police and prosecutors will be allowed access to the data under certain circumstances.

Mara Clarke of the international group Abortion Without Borders said that while the collection of the information may not appear harmful in itself, against the background of the recent tightening of already very strict abortion laws, the move will only increase fears among women in Poland over their reproductive rights.

She told IPS: “There is a difference between information being gathered in a free, democratic country, and being gathered in a state with a regime suppressing women’s rights. Any talk of a pregnancy register cannot be construed as anything other than an attempt to again attack women’s rights. It will only promote more fear among women.”

Some doctors agree, saying patients have already expressed fears about what the data collection could mean.

Michal Gontkiewicz, a gynaecologist at a district hospital in Plonsk, central Poland, told local TV station TVN 24: “As a tool in itself this is not dangerous, but patients may fear it will be used as a tool of the regime. Women are afraid that if they experience a spontaneous miscarriage, which is already a huge trauma for them, someone will accuse them of terminating the pregnancy, multiplying their trauma.”

The Health Ministry has rejected claims that it is trying to create a ‘pregnancy register’ and said the provision is being implemented as part of requirements to meet EU health regulations on patient data.

A spokesman for the ministry told IPS: “We are not creating any register, only expanding the reporting system based on recommendations of the European Commission. Only medics will have access to the data.

“Information about pregnancy is important for medics, because, for example, pregnant women should not undergo a number of medical procedures, and certain medicinal products cannot be prescribed to them.”

Some local doctors have also sought to play down the significance of the data collection, pointing out that bodies such as state social insurance institutions can already check up on pregnancies and that law enforcement agencies can already access medical data in certain instances if approved by a court.

But with questions over the country’s judiciary – Poland has already been censured by the European Commission over a lack of judicial independence – critics of the provision worry the existence of the register will only make an already bad situation worse.

The Polish rights group, Women’s Strike, claims police are already involved in questioning women whose pregnancies have ended, often after being contacted by angry partners.

“Given the current state of the judicial system in Poland and the threat of investigation in cases of undelivered pregnancies, this raises a lot of concerns,” Wiktoria Magnuszewska, an activist with Lex Q, a Polish LGBT+ advocacy organisation, told IPS.

Before the provision comes into effect, activists are trying to reassure Polish women that the provision does not represent a change to legislation on terminations.

Under Poland’s abortion laws, it is not illegal to have an abortion, but it is illegal to help someone do so. Many women in Poland who want an abortion self-administer pills bought online from abroad, or travel to neighbouring countries with less restrictive legislation, such as Germany and the Czech Republic, for terminations.

“Our Polish helpline has already had a few calls from women concerned about what the situation would be if they wanted an abortion. The good news is that there is no danger that women will no longer be able to self-administer abortions,” said Clarke.

However, the fear of how the ‘pregnancy register’ could be used already appears to be driving Polish women away from the country’s doctors.

Eva Ptaskova of the Ciocia Czesia volunteer organisation in the Czech Republic which helps Polish women access reproductive services, including abortions in local facilities, says her group has already been contacted by clients looking not for terminations, but gynaecologists who will treat them during their pregnancy because they do not want their details recorded in Poland.

She told IPS: “The situation in Poland is beginning to look more and more like something from The Handmaid’s Tale. What we are seeing is women with concerns that this [pregnancy register] could open the door to investigations of pregnancies that are ‘no longer’.

“This could deter women from seeking medical care, for instance, post-abortion care, which could then be very dangerous to their health. I worry it will get to the point where women will be scared to go to a gynaecologist at all because the information will be recorded that could one day be used against them.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);