Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/19238
Record ID: 259b81f9-9e68-4a94-af2f-9693a193b34f
Web resource: | https://www.unfpa.org/publications |
Type: | Report |
Title: | Addressing violence against women : piloting and programming |
Authors: | UNFPA & AIDOS |
Keywords: | Health;Policy;Measurement |
Year: | 2003 |
Publisher: | UNFPA |
Notes: |
|
General Overview:
This United Nations document reports on the consultation held in Rome during 15 – 19 September 2003, which included the world’s leading experts on gender-based violence, to help shape the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) policy and programming.
Objective:
The consultation was held to discuss the results of projects run in ten countries (Cape Verde, Ecuador, Guatemala, Lebanon, Lithuania, Mozambique, Nepal, Romania, the Russian Federation and Sri Lanka), which piloted a new programming guide to address gender-based violence.
Methods:
The consultation summarised the many years of work undertaken by the UNFPA. It built on the lessons from the pilot programs, in preventing and assessing gender-based violence through the UNFPA’s reproductive health services.
Discussion:
In four of these countries (Lebanon, Mozambique, Nepal and Romania), external evaluations were conducted. Summaries of these evaluations are listed in Appendix III of the document, which includes:
Option B: involves distribution of information materials, as well as asking clients about gender based violence, recording their responses in their medical histories and making referrals in cases where clients disclose violence.
Option C: includes actions of options A and B, as well as making in depth assessments of each case and referral to on site or off site treatment.
During the consultation in Rome, ten experts made presentations on various aspects of gender-based violence including:
a need for integration of the issue, so that that gender-based violence is introduced as a public health issue within mainstream health facilities;
project options, so that Option A is feasible in all cases and Option C in most cases. However, Option B, which refers clients to off-site facilities, can be problematic as there is no quality control over the support given with little follow-up.
URI: | https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/19238 |
Physical description: | 39 p. |
Appears in Collections: | Reports
|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.