You are here: Home > Work with us > Consultations > Choice for women: wanted pregnancies, safe births
> 7. Working with multilaterals
-
Bookmark this page
How can we deliver better results through multilateral aid?
Taking into account the list in the background information provided, who do you think DFID/UK should work with to improve reproductive, maternal and newborn health? How can we work in order to deliver better results through multilateral aid?
Please give reasons for the organisations you have chosen.
Read background information
When posting your comment, please state whether it is an individual, group or organisational response.
Comments 
Comments closed
This consultation has closed.
Our thanks for all the comments submitted. All of the ideas and suggestions put forward will feed into our new policy, helping to shape the direction of our work.
Once the final policy document is released you will be able to find it at www.dfid.gov.uk
DFID should also support
International Planned Parenthood Federation
Marie Stopes International
In 3rd world countries such as Bangladesh, Pakistan & Afghanistan where there is cultural issues sensitivity is absolute. Support and infrastructure training needs to be provided so the people can help themselves that is the jist of getting any community of its back help them to help themselves.. Birth control, delivering babies who’s parent are able to support should also be challenged in the rooms of thought.
Setting up preventive measures is as important as setting up and supporting development and delivering babies.
Inter-family marriages
problem births
data on children dying before they reach 4
helping parents to help their children
support or setup local clinics / outreach workers
Mobile ambulance
the list is endless
The very best way i would say is carrying out an in-depth feasibility, but one cure is absolute is train the locals to fend for their own communities.
Could write a lot more but…………….
Among the multilateral organizations mentioned in the background materials, two stand out as having the potential to benefit significantly from DFID’s support and collaboration, especially as relates to addressing unsafe abortion. UNFPA has vast experience addressing the family planning and other reproductive health needs of diverse populations across the planet and with more resources and encouragement could help many more women prevent and safely manage unintended pregnancy. The World Health Organization, particularly its Department of Reproductive Health and Research, also makes many important contributions in this area, including setting international standards for high-quality comprehensive reproductive health care, but lacks adequate resources to achieve its ambitious but critical agenda. Both these agencies make unique, valuable contributions to global maternal health, and continued moral and financial support from DFID could strengthen those contributions and accelerate international progress on the important issues they address.
Working with UN agencies and Bretton Woods bodies such as the World Bank and IMF is doubtless of value, and will be essential to addressing the infrastructural issues facing the poorest nations. However, the danger of the big multilateral agencies is that they tend to adopt a ‘one size fits all’ approach that has in the past been (arguably) deleterious to health infrastructures at local and national levels.
This can be through ‘structural readjustment’ programmes from the IMF forcing national governments to disinvest in their healthcare systems, or through the high level funding for single disease programmes which has brought major resources that are only available for a single, narrow dimension of healthcare (eg HIV treatment up-scaling). These draw professionals and infrastructure away from other areas of national and local health infrastructure (often due to better wages and greater prestige of working with the internationally funded project).
Many of our members report anecdotally on the huge damage to maternal health services of such single issue investment, and the immense disempowerment of health professionals working in the less well funded and recognised areas of the local health service (in particular, maternal health services).
CMF would urge DFID to work with all these bodies towards strategies that strengthen national and local health systems across the board, rather than in single issue exceptionalism, which can be disastrous for other areas of health need. Over-emphasis on single interventions to deal with maternal health is a particular concern, and over-emphasis in some bodies on access to ‘safe abortion’ rather than a more multi-level approach would be one area DFID should avoid.
If you really want to empower people, then you should consider talking to some of the people who promote natural family planning. Numerous studies have shown the effectiveness of this in a developing world situation.
DFID can continue working with the multilateral aid partners listed, however, we suggest that they also consider working with National Women’s and Youth organizations to enable them to contribute to the gender and equality issues they bring up and to effect change from the grassroots. These groups and others who have worked in these particular contexts would understand the problems and causes of the problems women face and may be well placed to deliver some of the (non-technical) solutions on the ground. The cost-effectiveness of programmes is well discussed, but the opportunity costs for women to access services should also be considered at the other side of the equation.
DFID can continue working with UNFPA and WHO because both the organisations have experience of working with the people of Bangladesh and they have achieved enormous success in reducing people’s sufferings. Moreover, they are familiar with the cultural setting of Bangladesh.