Dear Colleague,

We call this the Definitions series because these publications dive deep into the meanings of words, especially words being negotiated in international agreements and resolutions.  For many years, some activists have been promoting the controversial term "sexual and reproductive health and rights" (SRHR), which is distinct in important ways from the similarly controversial "sexual and reproductive health" and "reproductive rights," which have been accepted in UN agreements, unlike SRHR.

This month's Definitions explores the history of the term SRHR, how it has been used and defined, and where it has been consistently rejected from use.  Ultimately, it makes the case for why this term must be opposed in any negotiation, as its acceptance would signal a loss across multiple fronts for the international pro-life and pro-family movements.

Sincerely,

Rebecca Oas, Ph.D.
Director of Research

The phrase “sexual and reproductive health and rights,” or SRHR, is ubiquitous in the advocacy and programmatic work of UN agencies and the UN secretariat.  It frequently appears in publications issued by the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), and other agencies, as well as in statements issued by high-level officials including the UN Secretary-General.  But it was never agreed or defined in the resolutions negotiated by UN Member States, despite the intense efforts by some governments to see it adopted by the General Assembly.  This Definitions explores the controversy surrounding the phrase “sexual and reproductive health and rights,” the disconnect between the UN’s bureaucracy and the consensus of member states, and the reasons to continue to oppose its use. Read More >>>