Abortion opposition tries to derail Nigerian reproductive-health institute

A proposed reproductive-health institute could help Nigeria reduce its high maternal mortality rate and address other issues, such as HIV/AIDS.

Photo courtesy of the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

In Nigeria, discussion over a proposed reproductive-health care institute in the National Assembly turned into a debate about expanding the abortion laws. But there’s a catch: The proposal doesn’t mention such changes, but the improvements it does propose could save the lives of innumerable Nigerians.

The proposal, discussed in mid-February in the Nigerian Senate and supported by the Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics of Nigeria (SOGON), pushes for the establishment of a national institute of reproductive health (NIRH). Though Nigeria created a sexual- and reproductive-health policy in 2002, there has been no clear blueprint about how to address these health issues.

The proposed institute would function as a research clearinghouse; run a modern family planning clinic; and operate programs for the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and even infertility. 

Yet anti-abortion rhetoric in the media threatens the NIRH proposal, which has been mislabeled the “abortion bill.” In Africa’s most populous country, abortion is generally permitted to save the life of the woman.

Ipas Nigeria Director, Dr. Ejike Oji, said: “There is no doubt that this proposal, if passed, would help in improving the abysmal level of reproductive-health services in Nigeria. However, it falls short of addressing the full range of issues that take the lives of women in Nigeria.”

Statistics suggest just how badly Nigeria could use a national reproductive-health coordinating body. UNICEF figures from 1990-1999 estimate that only 6 percent of the population uses contraceptive methods. And if abortion remains a volatile issue in Nigeria, unsafe abortion continues to be deadly for too many of its women. The World Health Organization estimates that up to 10 percent of maternal deaths in West Africa stem from unsafe abortion; with 800 women dying per 100,000 live births, Nigeria is one of the world’s most dangerous places to get pregnant.

It was maternal deaths that particularly concerned SOGON, said the group’s former secretary-general, Dr. Friday Okonofua, in the Daily Trust newspaper of Abuja.

The NIRH proposal does cite unsafe abortion as “an extreme challenge in sexual and reproductive health because of wrong community perceptions about abortion.” But nowhere does it advocate changing the law, though safe abortion is acknowledged by the World Health Organization and other global institutions as a crucial part of reproductive-health care.

Again, the controversy points to the necessity of such an institute. Stigma surrounding abortion has dominated the debate, and it could block the institute’s creation and as a result, deprive Nigerians — male and female, young and old — of better health care. If approved into law, the proposal would include a community relations unit to explain the full gamut of reproductive-health services.

The proposal must go through another comment period in the Nigerian House of Representatives before it can become a bill.

For more information, contact:
Kirsten Sherk
Senior Associate, Media Relations
e-mail: sherkk@ipas.org
phone: 919.960.5612
fax: 919.929.0258