Sexual and reproductive health and rights. Lobbying, contestations and compromises - An analysis of the challenges to an agreed language at the UN

International agreements dating back to the landmark International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) Programme of Action in 1994, and the Beijing Declaration Platform for Action, 1995, have recognized the right to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights (SRHR), enabling women to make their own decisions over their bodies. These agreements committed states to provide universal access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services, including information and education, access to modern contraceptives, and safe abortion where legal. However, changes in the international political environment are demonstrating challenges in the protection of this agreed language on SRHR at the UN, having an impact on women’s access to SRH services globally. The broadening of the Mexico City Policy attempting to censor the language on SRHR, both domestically and internationally, as well as systematic lobbying of governments at the UN by conservative groups, is having a direct impact on the current global SRHR agenda setting. The aim of this study was to determine whether the efforts of the conservative opposition who seek to roll back the language on SRHR has been replicated in the UN outcome documents and resolutions between 2014 and 2019, before and after the latest reimplementation of the Mexico City Policy. This study presents the first empirical research on the disappearance of the language over time on the basis of a document review. The Health Policy Framework by Walt and Gilson (1994) allowed for an overview of the context in which the lobbying is taking place, map who the actors are that oppose SRHR, describe the process, and analyze the content of the documents. The results demonstrated a disappearance of the language on abortion in the CSW outcome documents, and a changing of the language on comprehensive sexuality education in the CSW and UN resolutions, which saw the removal of sexuality and placed an increased emphasis on the role of families. Furthermore, there was an inability of some states to accept sexual and reproductive health at all. This study has shown that the original agreed language from the ICPD and Beijing commitments are not safe from relentless opposition, and suggests that, going forward, funding for SRHR may need to look at more sustainable sources which are not subject to the international political environment.