Friday, September 16, 2005

Overaged mothers

There is a BBC report today Delaying babies 'defies nature' on an article published in the British Medical Journal, warning women who want to 'have it all' - career, status, family, etc. - not to "leave it too late" when it comes to babies.

What a bonne maman advice. This is what happens when obstetricians try to be sociologists, like cats trying to bark.

The rising average age of pregnant women is a result of a whole range of social changes. Putting the whole thing on the shoulders of the stereotyped egocentric "modern women", well, is at best insensitive, if not male chauvinest (a male chauvinist doesn't have to be male, in this case it is a female).

Here are the BBC-online readers respones to the report

Categories: ,

Thursday, September 15, 2005

Egypt: Islamic sisters advance

Egypte is probably home to women's movements in the muslim world. In the beginning of the 20th century, the first advocates of improving women's rights like Qasim Amin opened the debate about the problematic conditions in which muslim women lived. Various women's movements ranging from the more liberal one led by Huda Sharawi, Egyptien Women's Union, to the islamic women's movement led by Zaynab al-Ghazali, the Association of Muslim Women. There have also been writers and journalists defending women's rights, such as the novelist Nawal el-Saadawi, who recently declared herself candidate in the upcoming presidential election.

The September issue of "le Monde Diplomatique" carries this article "Egypt: Islamic sisters advance" about the new forms of islamic women's movement.

"The novelist Nawal el-Saadawi declared herself a candidate for the presidential elections, not hoping or intending to win, but to symbolise the new assertiveness of Egyptian women. Others who are active Muslims are determined on greater equality in public and private life read more...

Categories: , , , ,

More on the Human Development Report 2005

There are a lot of jewels in this year's UNDP Human Development Report - not that they are strikingly new ideas, in fact already repeated too many times by too many activists - but being admitted and denounced by the United Nations (albeit its own crisis), is a step forward. Afterall we are living in an institutional world and the words of somebody weight more than the very same words pronounced by the month of someone else.

So one of these jewels with a UN-stamp is about the irrationality and immorality of the trade policies of the EU and the United States. Among other things, I am highlighting the agricultural policies because its immediate effects touch probably the largest portion of the population in the developing countries.

Rich countries spend just over $1 billion a year on aid to developing country agriculture and just under $1 billion a day supporting their own agricultural systems. And the benficiary of these subsidies are large-scale farmers, corporate agribusiness interests and landowners. Look at the following examples:

  • European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) worthing $51 billion (€43 billion) in support on producers of a sector that accounts for less than 2% of employment but absorbs more than 40% of the total EU budget. Farmers and processors are paid four times the world market price for sugar, generating a 4 million tonne surplus. That surplus is then dumped on world markets with the help of more than $1 billion in export subsidies paid to a small group of sugar processors. This dumping lowers world prices by about one-third. As a result, far more efficient sugar exporters in developing countries suffer foreign exchange losses.

  • The US Department of Agriculture estimates that the country’s 20,000 cotton farmers will receive government payments of $4.7 billion in 2005 - an amount equivalent to the market value of the crop. These subsidies lower world prices by 9% - 13% and enable US producers to dominate world markets, accounting for about one-third of total world exports. Price distortions caused by US subsidies allow US cotton to drive out smallholder producers in developing countries relying on the production of cotton for survival, namely in West Africa.

    Then in a WTO press conference yesterday, guess what Pascal Lamy's response was when asked about this report:
    I had a look at this [Human Development] report that you mentioned, which I find variously balanced in various parts. And I do not think I would agree with each and every paragraph I read, nor was anyone asked to agree with what is written in this report. It is a report. But to my knowledge, it has not been sort of voted as such by any political, mandated and structured body.

    It is amazing to hear the Director General of the WTO emphasizing the virtue of democracy as a basis of legitimacy. Imagine only if the WTO under his leadership would be transformed into something in which every country has a vote of equal weight (that sounds almost like a fairy tale!)

    We do not question the sincerity of Mr. Lamy about democracy here. The problem in his comment is that analysis does not gain its legitimate by counting how many votes it gets. For analysis to be valid and legitimate, what is needed is solid arguments and evidence, not votes. Was any report ever "voted"? Who's entitled to vote anyway?

    Mr. Lamy was probably feeling in his old shoes as the EU ambassador to the WTO again, which explains his attempt to trivialise the HDR 2005, in which a whole chapter was dedicated to unfair trade rules largely in favour, and becoming more and more so, of the EU and the US trading interests because of their clout on the negotiating table.

    Categories: , , , , ,
  • Tuesday, September 13, 2005

    Inequality and health in the United States

    The United States leads the world in healthcare spending. On a per capita basis the United States spends twice the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development average on healthcare, or 13% of national income. Yet some countries that spend substantially less than the United States have healthier populations. US public health indicators are marred by deep inequalities linked to income, health insurance coverage, race, ethnicity, geography and—critically—access to care.

    Key US health indicators are far below those that might be anticipated on the basis of national wealth. Infant mortality trends are especially troublesome. Since 2000 a half century of sustained decline in infant death rates first slowed and then reversed. The infant mortality rate is now higher for the United States than for many other industrial countries. Malaysia — a country with an average income one-quarter that of the United States — has achieved the same infant mortality rate as the United States (figure 1). And the Indian state of Kerala has an urban infant death rate lower than that for African Americans in Washington, DC.

    Wide differences in health across socio - economic groups partly explain the poorer health outcomes in the United States than in other industrial countries. From the cradle to the grave the health of US citizens shows extreme divergence. For example, racial and ethnic health disparities are persistent—a result of differences in insurance coverage, income, language and education, among other factors (figure 2). African American mothers are twice as likely as white mothers to give birth to a low birthweight baby. Their children are twice as likely to die before their first birthday. Income differences are closely correlated with health differences. A baby boy from a family in the top 5% of the US income distribution will enjoy a life span 25% longer than a boy born in the bottom 5%.

    Many factors contribute to health inequalities. One important driver is the coverage of healthcare provision. The United States is the only wealthy country with no universal health insurance system. Its mix of employer-based private insurance and public coverage has never reached all Americans. While more than half the population have health insurance coverage through their employers and almost all the elderly are covered through Medicare, more than one in six non-elderly Americans (45 million) lacked health insurance in 2003. Over a third (36%) of families living below the poverty line are uninsured. Hispanic Americans (34%) are more than twice as likely to be uninsured as white Americans (13%), and 21% of African Americans have no health insurance. Health insurance coverage also varies widely across the 50 states, depending on the share of families with low incomes, the nature of employment and the breadth of each state’s Medicaid programme for low-income
    people.

    More than in any other major industrial country the cost of treatment is a major barrier to access in the United States. Over 40% of the uninsured do not have a regular place to receive medical treatment when they are sick, and more than a third say that they or someone in their family went without needed medical care, including recommended treatments or prescription drugs, in the last year because of cost.

    Unequal access to healthcare has clear links to health outcomes. The uninsured are less likely to have regular outpatient care, so they are more likely to be hospitalized for avoidable health problems. Once in a hospital, they receive fewer services and are more likely to die than are insured patients. They also receive less preventive care. The Institute of Medicine estimates that at least 18,000 Americans die prematurely each year solely because they lack health insurance. Being born into an uninsured household increases the probability of death before age 1 by about 50%.

    Unequal access to healthcare has a powerful effect on health inequalities linked to race, which are only partly explained by insurance and income inequalities. One study finds that eliminating the gap in healthcare between African Americans and white Americans would save nearly 85,000 lives a year. To put this figure in context, technological improvements in medicine save about 20,000 lives a year.

    The comparison highlights a paradox at the heart of the US health system. High levels of personal healthcare spending reflect the country’s cutting-edge medical technology and treatment. Yet social inequalities, interacting with inequalities in health financing, limit the reach of medical advance




    Categories: , , , , , ,

    Monday, September 12, 2005

    Environemental injustice, racism and Katrina

    Quotations from"The Other Side of the Big Easy", by Liza Featherstone, published in Alternet, September 12, 2005.

    "the response to Hurricane Katrina seems to be proving: people in power viewed the city's poorest residents as, says Robert Bullard, "expendable in some sense."

    "What Katrina has exposed is decades of benign neglect and racism, which you can't prettify with a crawfish étouffé. This is the other side of New Orleans."

    "...others fear that the city could be rebuilt as a massive gentrification project, one with no room for Katrina's displaced."

    Categories: , , ,

    Friday, September 02, 2005

    Hurricane Katrina is racist?

    This Monday somebody told me about a hurricane savaging a certain southern state of the U.S., lots of people evacuated, mixed with comments like "now the Americans know what it means to be a refugee". I don't have a TV at home, so I didn't have any idea about the scale of the disaster.

    Nobody deserve to suffer from calamities, and usually it is the poorest and the weakest to pay the highest price and are the least capable to recover from it afterwards. That was what I thought, but anyway, since then I started to pay attention to the news coverage on Internet on Katrina the Hurricane.

    Then something strikes me - is it Katrina or the journalists who focus on the blacks? Almost all of the pictures about the hurricane show African-American victims.

    Neither of those. The area is mostly populated by African-Americans. Here is the racial makeup and poverty level of the city New Orleans:

    28.05% White, 67.25% African American, 0.20% Native American, 2.26% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 0.93% from other races, and 1.28% from two or more races. 3.06% of the population are Hispanic or Latino of any race.

    And 27.9% of the population and 23.7% of families are below the poverty line.

    Source: Wikipedia

    And we should also be reminded that between 2001 and 2005, the government budget spent on flood and hurricane protection projects in New Orleans declined from $147 million to $82 million. Hurricanes are natural disasters, but there is nothing natural about what makes it so destructive. It is neglect and poverty.

    Neglect by the most powerful and influential country on our planet. Poverty in the very same and richest country of the world.

    Read also:
    Hurricane Katrina: a calamity compounded by poverty and neglect, by Joseph Kay, on World Socialist Website, 31 August 2005
    Race and Hurricane Katrina: two questions
    , on Amardeep Singh's blog

    Categories: , , , , , ,

    Thursday, September 01, 2005

    Equal rights for sexual orientation in Hong Kong

    A friend of mine initiated a petition for anti-discrimination legislation for sexual orientation in Hong Kong. Signaures were gathered and handed to the government in June this year. The court hearings took place in July. And in August, he won the case!

    Below are extracts of his blog entries on the issue:

    Interviews, Saturday, August 27, 2005

    The last few days have been overwhelming with all the reports and attentions. Suddenly half or Hong Kong wanted to report my story. Already have had more than a handful of interviews the last few days, you can’t not be amazed by some of the questions they ask you… Here are a few good examples:
    • Do you ever have to disguise your sexuality when you go for a job interview?
    • Do you feel guilty or ashamed of your sexual orientation?
    • Do you have a boyfriend? (“No.”) Then, will your male partner come to join the interview later?
    • So, you said you have had been discriminated against for all these times and your rights of having a fulfilling relationship have been deprived. Have your then, since the declaration came out, exercised your new earned rights (i.e. engaged in any sexual activities)?
    • You said you’ve always aware of your sexual orientation, have you ever had any girlfriends?
    And these two are my personal favorites so far:
    • How do you see yourself from any other normal people?
    • Now, you have changed the laws, when will you consider turning straight again?
    You’ve be surprised some of those tabloid questions actually came from papers like some commercial-business-related papers.... Read more