Accelerate progress—sexual and reproductive health and rights for all: report of the Guttmacher–Lancet Commission

The 2019 Report seeks to inform policy and decision-makers, inside and outside the water community, how improvements in water resources management and access to water supply and sanitation services are essential to overcoming poverty and addressing various other social and economic inequities. In an increasingly globalized world, the impacts of water-related decisions cross borders and affect everyone. Extreme events, environmental degradation, population growth, rapid urbanization, unsustainable and inequitable consumption patterns, conflicts and social unrest, and unprecedented migratory flows are among the interconnected pressures faced by humanity, often hitting those in vulnerable situations the hardest through their impacts on water. Addressing the inequalities faced by disadvantaged groups requires tailored solutions that take account of the day-to-day realities of people and communities in vulnerable situations. Properly designed and adequately implemented policies, efficient and appropriate use of financial resources, as well as evidence-based knowledge on water resources and water-related issues are also vital to eliminating inequalities in access to safe drinking water and sanitation. Titled ‘Leaving No One Behind ’, the report reinforces the commitments made by the UN member states in adopting the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and in recognizing the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, both of which are essential for eradicating poverty and for building prosperous, peaceful societies.

The United Nations World Water Development Report 2019: Leaving No One Behind

Countdown to 2030: tracking progress towards universal coverage for reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health

Background Globally, the number of refugees and asylum seekers has reached record highs. Past research in refugee mental health has reported wide variation in mental illness prevalence data, partially attributable to methodological limitations. This systematic review aims to summarise the current body of evidence for the prevalence of mental illness in global refugee populations and overcome methodological limitations of individual studies. Methods and findings A comprehensive search of electronic databases was undertaken from 1 January 2003 to 4 February 2020 (MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EBM Reviews, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PILOTS, Web of Science). Quantitative studies were included if diagnosis of mental illness involved a clinical interview and use of a validated assessment measure and reported at least 50 participants. Study quality was assessed using a descriptive approach based on a template according to study design (modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). Random-effects models, based on inverse variance weights, were conducted. Subgroup analyses were performed for sex, sample size, displacement duration, visa status, country of origin, current residence, type of interview (interpreter-assisted or native language), and diagnostic measure. The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD) 42016046349. The search yielded a result of 21,842 records. Twenty-six studies, which included one randomised controlled trial and 25 observational studies, provided results for 5,143 adult refugees and asylum seekers. Studies were undertaken across 15 countries: Australia (652 refugees), Austria (150), China (65), Germany (1,104), Italy (297), Lebanon (646), Nepal (574), Norway (64), South Korea (200), Sweden (86), Switzerland (164), Turkey (238), Uganda (77), United Kingdom (420), and the United States of America (406). The prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was 31.46% (95% CI 24.43–38.5), the prevalence of depression was 31.5% (95% CI 22.64–40.38), the prevalence of anxiety disorders was 11% (95% CI 6.75–15.43), and the prevalence of psychosis was 1.51% (95% CI 0.63–2.40). A limitation of the study is that substantial heterogeneity was present in the prevalence estimates of PTSD, depression, and anxiety, and limited covariates were reported in the included studies. Conclusions This comprehensive review generates current prevalence estimates for not only PTSD but also depression, anxiety, and psychosis. Refugees and asylum seekers have high and persistent rates of PTSD and depression, and the results of this review highlight the need for ongoing, long-term mental health care beyond the initial period of resettlement.

/pdf/the-prevalence-of-mental-illness-in-refugees-and-asylum-5gt5y2ket5.pdf

The prevalence of mental illness in refugees and asylum seekers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Pre-migration and post-migration factors associated with mental health in humanitarian migrants in Australia and the moderation effect of post-migration stressors: findings from the first wave data of the BNLA cohort study

/pdf/global-trends-forced-displacement-in-2015-v8jpe0dp2o.pdf

Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2015

Racism, xenophobia, discrimination, and the determination of health

Confronting the consequences of racism, xenophobia, and discrimination on health and health-care systems

International borders are mechanisms of racialised exclusion and inclusion. Building on my prior work on liberal racial borders, in this essay based on my keynote speech at the AjV-DGIR conference on ‘Jurisdiction – Who speaks international law?’, I reflect on aspects of the doctrine of jurisdiction as crucial mechanisms through which these borders reinforce a persisting global racialised order.

Race, Borders, and Jurisdiction

I am joining you remotely from Los Angeles, in the United States, and I would like to begin by acknowledging my presence on the traditional, ancestral and unceded territory of the Gabrielino-Tongva, the peoples indigenous to this territory.1 In beginning with a land acknowledgment, there is a sense in which I have foreshadowed my reflections on the questions posed to us panelists in this session, on the in- and exclusiveness of international law. One could visit Los Angeles, and indeed one could even live in Los Angeles, but remain entirely oblivious to the ways in which doctrines of inclusion and exclusion in international law have shaped its geography, its demography, its trajectory and, without exaggeration, the totality of this city. But for the Gabrielino-Tongva, however, the indigenous peoples who are the traditional caretakers of this land, the inclusiveness and exclusiveness of international law, its history of excluding non-Europeans for sovereign status,2 its doctrine of discovery that permitted dispossession and exclusion from property regimes, its ongoing failure to deliver reparations for colonial domination, genocide and enslavement, notwithstanding reparations that were paid to former enslavers and to former colonial powers such as France,3 inclusion and exclusion quite obviously sit at the very core of international law. 

ET Achiume

Papers

Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2015

Racism, xenophobia, discrimination, and the determination of health

Confronting the consequences of racism, xenophobia, and discrimination on health and health-care systems

Race, Borders, and Jurisdiction

The In- or Ex-clusiveness of International Law