To think WHO are trying to commit organisational suicide? They’ve said that women of childbearing age should not drink alcohol AT ALL.

[RickiTarr]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/16/accused-sexism-saying-women-childbearing-age-should-not-drink/

That's not the point though is it.

All sorts of things impact on the health of babies and children. A massive raft of things. Including things the father does.

The point is that for the WHO to include in their draft doc what they did is ridiculous and straight out of the playbook of those who seek to control the behaviour of women. Usually a patriarchal religious approach.

This line would not have slipped through or been misworded or any of the other reaches on this thread.

This approach is in action in various places around the world.

Women imprisoned for life for miscarrying in el Salvador.
At least one woman imprisoned in the USA for damaging her foetus through eg drug use
The idea that a foetus has equal personhood to the already born grown living woman it is inside meant a woman who was dead had her functions kept going by machines because of an idea that in law it was a person and so switching off would be wrong. Her body started decomposing. It was traumatising for her existing children.

Funnily enough these things tend to happen in parts of the world that have banned or are strict on abortion ie they don't like it at all.

This is a really dangerous route for the WHO to signal support of.

This line should never have been included. Damage will have been done. A awful lot of people, decision makers, governments will take this as approval of their treatment of and attitude to women and girls.

@NiceGerbil
All sorts of things impact on the health of babies and children. A massive raft of things. Including things the father does.

Exactly.
Why is it never a case of father has to stop drinking in child bearing age because he could affect the quality of his sperm?!
Yes, the mum has to carry the foetus for 9 months.
Mum is a person in her own right too though!
There comes a point you say hang on a fucking minute.
Yes, I get that we have to keep babies healthy before they're born.
Of course.
Does that mean we stop existing as people in the meantime?!

Plus, some women may never want kids!
Should they all stop drinking just in case they might sometime in the future?!
Er no

The other thing here which I'm sure many will have issue with.

Is that FAS is a well recognised condition with formal and well established diagnostic criteria.

FASD is a bit different. It's 'spectrum' of issues many of which have no formal diagnostic criteria and includes a range of issues. The jury is out on many of them, whether they are due to alcohol or not. S quick Google gave me estimates of FASD in populations in USA and UK from 1.something% to 17%.

There is no evidence to conclude that minimal or moderate drinking in pregnancy causes issues. It's an unknown.

What I have noticed over the last 10- 15 years is the shift in language etc. on here.

First it was FAS mainly talked about and FASD a little.
Then FASD started to be talked about more and it was mainly posters who posted really scaremongering unsupported things that referenced it.
Now FAS is on the FASD spectrum and it's common use.

The desire to control women and especially pregnant women is deeply embedded in many societies.

The desire to blame women when things go wrong is also deeply embedded.

It was only recently found out that older fathers meant an increased risk of miscarriage. Up until that point it was always that something had gone wrong with the woman.

Those who think the idea that action should be taken to prevent women of child bearing age drinking alcohol is aok are supporting an extreme position.

Think of the position of women all over the world. What will be taken from what they have said. Women are vessels and need to be controlled for most of their lives on the offchance they get pregnant and keep the baby and are cannot be trusted to make the sensible choices when TTC or during pregnancy.

@Quaggars

Plus, some women may never want kids! Should they all stop drinking just in case they might sometime in the future?! Er no

Yes. So many aspects to this, but the idea that women don’t understand their risk/likelihood of conception and how to use contraception where necessary is enraging on its own.

Do you think all women in the world have access to contraception? This is the World Health Organisation - trying to improve public health globally. One of the things WHO does want to promote is access to contraception, and also free healthcare, and prevent violence against women, and promote their empowerment.

In this case it’s concerned about the harm alcohol has on others who surround drinkers - including unborn babies, it measures this through associated mortality, morbidity and DALYs and see it as an avoidable risk, but highlights that it all must be mindful of cultural norms etc

'promote their empowerment'

How is it promoting the empowerment of women globally for the world health organisation to state that they should be looking for ways to prevent women of child bearing age drinking alcohol?

Governments look to these things for action plans for their countries.

To include this line is gobsmacking.

But if you look at the world and see WHO as an agent of increased female oppression then that’s up to you.

The whole point of this is because governments have largely failed to follow any of the advice in the 2010 policy - Global plan to prevent the harmful use of alcohol (or something). Governments absolutely do not blindly translate all of WHOs public health advice into heavy handed legislation.

Yes. So many aspects to this, but the idea that women don’t understand their risk/likelihood of conception and how to use contraception where necessary is enraging on its own.

Yes, but still, as you say, so many layers.
Even if a woman doesn't fully understand likelihood of conception (that's a small percentage, surely) does that mean people get to choose what happens to their bodies?

You have no issues with what they wrote then?

As an action from an org that many governments use to guide them in their plans.

That women of child bearing age should be prevented from drinking alcohol. Would be a positive action to improve the health of the nation.

Really?

Emmet and the impact in eg USA where women are in prison for damaging their foetus through eg drug use?

This will be taken as support, ammunition.

Yes, I do have an issue with this sentence. I would not have an issue with educating WRA with the risks of drinking during pregnancy. The shift between those who are pregnant and those who aren’t yet and will soon be is pretty constant but unpredictable - it makes sense to focus pregnancy health promotion messages on all WRA.

I actually don’t like the idea that sometimes pregnant women are prevented from buying alcohol, I am absolutely and totally pro-choice and of course believe that a woman’s control of her body extends to her uterus and the foetus has pretty much no rights until it’s born - but it’s shit for the babies who are born with avoidable conditions

I don’t see this as indicative of WHO being a misogynistic organisation who want to introduce Gilead and who should be disbanded, I would like clarification of what they meant - and I think the focus on these four or five words has totally misrepresented the point of the paper - when you read it did you get the opinion that it was about trying to control women? I also think it is ok for WHO to want to have public health measures to reduce the incidence of FAS.

Do you think all women in the world have access to contraception?

No, I'm well aware some women won't know about contraception.

This is the World Health Organisation - trying to improve public health globally. One of the things WHO does want to promote is access to contraception, and also free healthcare, and prevent violence against women, and promote their empowerment.
Yes, i agree. In this case though it's about women of a child bearing age not ever drinking.

In this case it’s concerned about the harm alcohol has on others who surround drinkers - including unborn babies, it measures this through associated mortality, morbidity and DALYs and see it as an avoidable risk, but highlights that it all must be mindful of cultural norms etc
Are women people in their own right, or not though?
That thinking is the same road as women can never have an abortion.

I found this paper by Devi Sridhar, from 2012. I had no idea the WHO had such power - not just to recommend, but to compel.

'Unlike any other global-health body, the World Health Organization (WHO) can create legally binding conventions, and it only requires a two-thirds majority vote to do so. Yet this power is vastly underused.'

www.nature.com/articles/482302a The piece is 'Regulate alcohol for Global Health'

Given that the events of the past 18 months suggest that the WHO is vulnerable to economic and political manipulation, its latent power makes me deeply uncomfortable.

Well exactly this is not trivial.

Even if they alter it, the fact it was in a published draft sends a certain message.

Especially to all the countries around the world that love controlling women especially around having babies.

Women are in prison in the USA for doing things in pregnancy that damaged their foetus.

The USA health org said a few years back that women of childbearing age should be considered 'pre pregnant' and therefore behave in a way suitable for that.

In this case it’s concerned about the harm alcohol has on others who surround drinkers - including unborn babies, it measures this through associated mortality, morbidity and DALYs and see it as an avoidable risk, but highlights that it all must be mindful of cultural norms etc

If the WHO is concerned about the indirect effects of alcohol why have they failed to mention with such specificity the harms caused overwhelmingly by male drinking and strategies to reduce/prevent this (ie prevent the initiation of drinking in adult males, ensure that aid money/government support is, where possible, paid to the woman of the family).

When I commented on this thread last night I honestly didn't think I would come back to find women supporting, and making excuses for, that sentence.
It's ok to stand up for women. It's ok to disagree with men.

I don't understand the fuss. I mean it clearly means 'if you are planning on getting pg or are pg we recommend you dont drink' what's wrong with that?
(also i am on a clinical trial and have been told under 55is consideredchild bearing age)

Why doesn't it clearly state what it clearly means then? First rule of writing such an important document.

@a8mint

I don't understand the fuss. I mean it clearly means 'if you are planning on getting pg or are pg we recommend you dont drink' what's wrong with that? (also i am on a clinical trial and have been told under 55is consideredchild bearing age)

No, that’s your interpretation. That’s what you’d hope it would say, but it’s not what is written. They could have said women of childbearing age who intend to conceive within the next 6 months but they didn’t.

@Quaggars - it’s not just about not knowing about contraception. It’s about not having access - according to WHO over 200 million women want contraception and can’t get it.

It’s also about limited scope for public health education. There are contact points for different groups - obviously SAC it’s school, pre-sac some clinics etc. That’s the point of the demographics - how, when and where do you focus your message to reach people.

Regarding male violence it says that this should be read in conjunction with the framework on interpersonal violence, I don’t know if this is the respect framework specifically to prevent violence against women - 19 pages on that, or a different framework - but violence is targeted a lot more than FAS, but within different frameworks.

I know it’s ok to stand up for women - I just disagree that WHO is fundamentally shit and needs to be broken up - as per the OP - it’s ok to disagree with women too.

Yes women have rights, but a public health body is going to also be concerned with limiting harm to unborn babies - presumably you all think that obviously reduction in FAS rates is a good thing, we all also agree that this should not be achieved through women not being allowed to drink.

The disagreement comes on whether WHO is no longer fit for purpose, fundamentally misogynistic and heralding GIlead

Everyone wants to limit harm to unborn babies, but surely a better way to do this is through the behaviour of men. I am assuming (happy to be corrected) that few if any cases are born to women who just had no idea about the connection between alcohol and fetal harm, or did but drank by accident (?). The vast vast majority of FAS cases are born to women with alcohol addiction and other issues. Who have most likely suffered the childhood trauma of male violence. So FAS can be cut off at the source by reducing harm to these women themselves, then they might never become alcoholics in the first place.