03089nas a2200145 4500000000100000008004100001653001500042653001200057653004400069100001700113245011000130300001000240050002200250520267100272 2013 d10aDisability10aleprosy10aSexual and Reproductive health services1 aStrengholt M00aSexual and reproductive health and rights services for people affected with leprosy or other disabilities a28 p. aSTRENGHOLT 2013 t3 a
Aim To assess the amount of attention that is being paid to the sexual and reproductive health of people living with a disability. Background Although it is globally recognized that there is a need for effective and sustainable sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) programmes, the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) are still not achieved. People with a disability, especially women, cope with a double stigma. Women with a disability are more likely to be the victim of sexual assault and abuse. They are often excluded from SRHR education, programmes and services, resulting in more health related issues and discrimination. Such SRHR services will empower them, making them more able to participate in a community, and will reduce the change of sexual violence. Design The study design is an observational online survey. Method Through an online survey data were be collected from organisations that undertake activities for SRHR, disability, or leprosy. With this data a total proportion of attention was scored, per primary type of an organisation, through four outcome measures: undertaking activities for the SRHR of disabled people; level of inclusion of SRHR for disabled people in current activities; availability of a policy concerning the SRHR of disabled people; availability of plans for the SRHR of disabled people within the next three years. Analysis was done using SPSS 20.0 IBM. Findings Leprosy organisations undertake statistically significant (p=0.001)less action for the SRHR of disabled people than general disability organisations. More than half of all organisations (n=91) undertake activities for the SRHR of disabled people. Having an additional focus, and coopering with organisations with an additional focus is found to be a mediator in the relation between an organisation and three of the four outcome measures; undertaking activities for the SRHR for disabled people (p<0.0001, p<0.0001 respectively), level of inclusion of SRHR for disabled people in current programmes (p=0.005, p=0.004 respectively), and having plans for the future to undertake action for the SRHR of disabled people (p<0.0001, p<0.0001 respectively). The availability of a policy was not associated with having an additional focus (p=0.077) and cooperation with such organisations (p=0.106). Conclusion Moderate to high attention is being paid to the SRHR of disabled people. This is likely to be an overestimation due to information and selection bias. The proportion of activities for the SRHR of disabled people is rather low, compared to the amount of attention, thus can be concluded that there is more talk, than action.