The Many Ways the US is Attacking Reproductive Rights at the United Nations

The United Nations makes important decisions around a wide variety of issues including the sexual and reproductive health and rights of people around the world. Since the beginning of the Trump administration, the U.S. has been actively fighting against providing global sexual and reproductive health and rights. Shannon Kowalski, Director of Advocacy and Policy at the International Women’s Health Coalition (IWHC), sits down to talk with us about how the U.S. has attempted to weaken reproductive health and rights around the world through their role at the UN.

The UN has played a critical role in not only defining sexual and reproductive health and rights, but supporting countries in implementing policies that protect and uphold sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. The International Conference on Population and Development meeting in Cairo, Egypt in 1994 was a turning point in moving the global conversation from population family planning to looking at sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights from a human rights perspective.

 The Trump administration has been distancing the U.S. from multilateral institutions for years. This includes pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement, pulling out of the Human Rights Council and even now threatening to terminate the U.S.’ relationship with the World Health Organization. The Trump administration rejects UN resolutions that even mention the language or allude to the concepts of sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights, gender, or comprehensive sexuality education, as the administration is attempting to establish the U.S. as a ‘pro-life’ country in the international arena. The Trump administration has also attempted to systematically remove references to the term “gender” in UN agreements, moving back to old language that focuses on women leaving out the LGBTQ+ community. Fortunately, the Trump administration has not been very successful in advancing their ideological agenda through the UN.

 Despite the fact that the WHO is a critical body for ensuring appropriate responses to global pandemics and humanitarian work, the administration long-ago singled out the WHO as an organization that they wanted to ‘de-fund.’ Unfortunately, the WHO has been a target of the religious-right for a long time due to their vital work in sexual and reproductive health and rights.

 The resolutions and policies that come of the UN are taken very seriously by the rest of the international world. The UN and its bodies provide the world with programs, policies, and funding that support achieving global objectives. People in the U.S. and around the world may be harmed by the Trump administration’s blatant disregard for multilateral institutions, inclusive language, and human rights.

Links from this episode

International Women’s Health Coalition on Twitter
International Women’s Health Coalition on Facebook
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
World Health Organization
UN Women
Sustainable Development Goals

Transcript

Jennie: Welcome to RePROs Fight Back, a podcast where we explore all things reproductive health, rights and justice. I'm your host, Jennie Wetter, and I'll be helping you stay informed around issues like birth control, abortion, sex education and LGBTQ issues and much, much more-- giving you the tools you need to take action and fight back. Okay, let's dive in.

Read More

Jennie: Hi, and welcome to this week's episode. I'm your host, Jennie Wetter, and my pronouns are she/her. So for our last episode, it was already recorded and at our editor, when everything happened with the killing of George Floyd and the protests. I didn't have a chance to sit down and record an introduction that included all that information last time. So I want to make sure and address it this time and know that…it's not just the killing of George Floyd or Breonna Taylor or Tony McDade. There are so many Black people who have been killed by the police because of systemic racism, because of white supremacy. And it's incumbent on all of us to speak out, into do the work to make it better. So, you know, that's what I want to spend a couple minutes talking about in my intro is some of the things I've been thinking about and doing, and, you know, it's really important, particularly for us white people to take the time to speak out and to raise our voices. But just as important is to shut up and listen. Shut up and listen. We need to listen to what the Black community is asking for. We need to make sure we are asking for what they want, that we are advocating for solutions that are the ones they are asking for, and that will help them. So shut up and listen. One of the things that's really important for all of us to do is take a look at your social media. Who are you following? Whose voices are you hearing? Does it look like the world? Are you making sure that you are following Black women, other women of color? Are you following the LGBTQ community? Are you following trans people within that community? Are you following Black trans people? Are you following disabled people? Are you following disabled people of color? Make sure that you're hearing from the voices you should be hearing from, otherwise, you're not going to know what's happening and what they are asking for. And if we're not hearing what they want, how can we raise their voices and make sure we're asking for the right things? So shut up and listen, you know, and…look at your bookshelf. Are you reading only white authors? Make sure that you are reading and watching movies and listening to podcasts from a full range of voices. It's so important right now. There's so many great resources out there. We need to take the time to do the work. And that includes me. I am taking the time to do the work because I'm still learning and I'm trying to do the work and I know I'm going to make mistakes and that's okay. And I need to, I need to get better and I need to do better so that we can create a world that is more equitable, but just doing the work isn't enough. You need to find all the various ways you can support. And sometimes if you have the money that means donating. I know I have been doing a lot of rage donating to a lot of different organizations, and there are so many out there from bail funds to your local Black Lives Matter to reproductive justice groups-- find some groups and support them. They need it. They're doing the work. The work needs to be done. They need our support. You know, you can also go to protests if you are able, not everybody is able. I know I love protests. They are a lot of fun, but I've noticed the last several years, I get really bad anxiety when I go to big ones. I know I need to measure when I can go. I can't go to all of them. I try to go to some, so find ways that you can show up and make a change. But most of all, make sure you're listening to the people who’s lives we are trying to make better. And you know, you may hear some things that sound scary, whether that's defund the police or abolish the police, but before you freak out by hearing those things, stop, take a minute. Do the research, make sure you are understanding what people are talking about and asking for, and maybe you'll support those things, or maybe you won't, but you need to be informed before you can make those decisions and not just take it on what other people are saying. You need to take the time and do the work. And this work is hard. It's hard and it's going to be a lot, but we need to do it because we cannot keep in place these white supremacist structures that are currently in place. We need to tear it down and we need to do the work.

Jennie: I really, I made a personal commitment when I started doing this podcast that I wanted to make sure that I was covering a range of issues and talking to a range of voices. And I have tried, but I really need to double down on that and make sure that I am talking to more reproductive justice advocates and to the full range of the community. And I need to continue to push myself to do better. And by doing that, we can all start to make the world a better place-- the world we want to see. And so I hope we all can take the time to do the work and not give up. Don't look back at this a month later and have forgotten about all of it. I really hope that this time is going to be different and that we are going to make the changes we want to see. And I really hope we can see this systemic change that needs to happen. So I think with that, I'm going to leave it there, but just remember to listen, make sure you are hearing from all the voices you need to hear from. And don't just hear from them. Think about whose voices you're elevating, right? Like on social media, if you're on Twitter or whatever, don't just follow those people-- think about it when you're retweeting, like who are you retweeting, whose voice are you choosing to elevate and make sure more people see and make sure that you're tweeting a range of people, right? Don't just tweet the same white people that you follow. Just make sure that you are committing yourself to this work. And in the ways you can. Okay, with that, we're going to turn to this week's episode. And this week we're going to be talking about the things the US is doing at the UN. It doesn't really relate. But one of the ties that I think about is that the ACLU actually reached out to the UN to have them investigate the killings of Black people in the US. And so the UN is important and not just for other countries, right? It is important to make sure the work of justice is being done in our country. With that, actually, we're going to turn to this week's interview. So this week we're going to be talking about the ways that the US is fighting sexual and reproductive health and rights at the UN. I am super excited to have Shannon Kowalski at the International Women's Health Coalition on with me today. She does a lot of amazing work for IWHC and spends a lot of her time focusing on work at the UN, not just the US but the work around sexual and reproductive health and rights at the UN. And I couldn't think of a better person to talk to about all of this. So I hope you enjoy my great conversation with Shannon Kowalski.

Jennie: Hi, Shannon. Thank you so much for being here today.

Shannon: Thank you for having me, Jennie.

Jennie: So before we start, do you want to quickly introduce yourself, including your pronouns?

Shannon: Sure. My name is Shannon Kowalski. I'm the Director of Advocacy and Policy with the International Women's Health Coalition and my pronouns are she/her.

Jennie: Great. And you know, we're going to talk today about the ways the US has been attacking sexual and reproductive health and rights at the UN, but maybe we should start before that and talk about the ways that the US has been attacking multilateral institutions in general.

Shannon: Yeah, I think it became really clear early on that the Trump administration didn't respect multilateral processes and the role of the United Nations in particular, in bringing countries together to find solutions to really difficult problems. So amongst some of the first attacks on the UN that we saw was the Trump administration pulling out of things like the Paris Climate Agreement, you know, and the UNESCO, which is the United Nations Education Science and Culture Organization. Their group is really critical in promoting education of girls in particular around the world. And they've also, instead of, you know, taking a place at the table and using their influence to be able to reform institutions and make them stronger, they've often taken the tactic of just walking away, which is a little bit perplexing. So they've pulled out of the Human Rights Council, for example, and are now threatening to terminate their relationship with the World Health Organization (WHO), where the US has historically been the strongest voice. And so what they have done is not only attempted to weaken these institutions, but they've also, you know, wielded the power of the United States and influencing these kinds of institutions as well. And I think when we're talking about sexual and reproductive health and rights and the disregard for multilateralism and the role of bringing countries together, like I said, to try to find solutions to really difficult problems, that attacks are often intertwined. And so, for example, the UN makes important policy on gender equality and women's rights, human rights development broadly, and the Trump administration, because they're being so single-mindedly focused on undermining the right of individuals to make decisions about their own bodies, have also used the attacks on sexual reproductive health…to attack multilateral organizations. So one of the first things that they did, for example, after implementing the Global Gag Rule was defunding the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). A lot of their attacks on the WHO related to COVID-19 are also linked to the work that WHO has done to promote sexual health and rights around the world. And most recently they have attacked the UN COVID-19 humanitarian response, because it mentioned that access to sexual and reproductive health services and maintaining access to critical care during this time was an important priority in the country's crusade responses. So the attacks on multilateralism and the attacks on sexual reproductive health and rights are often very linked.

Jennie: So I think one of the things that people maybe aren't as familiar with is when people think of the United Nations, they may be more familiar with the security council or peacekeeping, but they may not know the ways that the UN is involved in sexual and reproductive health. And so I think maybe that's also another point that is good background before we get into the specific things the US has done.

Shannon: Sure. I mean, the UN has been the central body of global policy making on a range of different issues and, um, sexual and reproductive health and rights. The UN has actually played a really critical role in defining those terms and what it is that what you mean by them, and then supporting countries to be able to implement programs and their own policies to ensure access to sexual reproductive health services and protect these rights. There are a few critical UN agreements that were negotiated in the 1990s that sort of set the ground for UN leadership in this space. One of them is the program of action of the International Conference on Population and Development. We call it the ICPD program of action for short, and that was a critical turning point for the UN response to these issues. Previously, the UN had had an interest in population dynamics, and a lot of that interest was in supporting countries to limit tactility and to control population growth at this conference in 1994, which took place in Cairo, Egypt. It changed the paradigm and said gender equality and women's human rights are fundamental, and that coercive population control measures were not only a violation of human rights [inaudible] and not a helpful way of supporting populations. It also recognize the centrality of empowering women and girls and all people really to be able to have control over and make decisions about their own body, including their fertility, and defines the concept of reproductive rights and also articulated the set of sexual and reproductive health services that all people should have access to. And at that conference, the government and WHO agreed that they should aspire to achieve universal access to sexual and reproductive health services and the target date they set for that was 2005, and we haven't quite made it, but this is an example of the important roles that the UN has stayed in both in reference to women's and girls and gender nonconforming people, human rights, but also ensuring access to sexual reproductive health services and setting policy on sexual and reproductive rights. There are a number of UN bodies in addition to the policymaking function that the UN has that focuses specifically on this. So the United Nations Population Fund, for example, is an organization that predated the ICPD program of action that since has become a central body in supporting countries in the global south in particular, to develop and implement policies, to expand access to sexual reproductive health services and protect these rights. And the World Health Organization, of course, is another important player in this state. And they provide technical guidance to governments to support them, to take the best evidence and put it into policy at the country level on these issues. Finally, we have UNFPA Women, which is really important, and the youngest of the UN organizations, which focuses on gender equality and women's rights, and they've also been really strong… for sexual and reproductive health. So the UN has played a really critical role in both defining what it is that we mean by these terms and supporting countries to be able to aspire to achieving them.

Jennie: Yeah. And, you know, the US has also played a big role in how these terms get defined and sometimes for really good ways and sometimes for less good ways. And I think this administration really came in hard and, you know, like you said, one of their first things they did was try to defund the United Nations Population Fund, but also they made a really big statement by when they attended the first big UN conference that happened when they took over the Office of the Commission on the Status of Women, they appointed hate groups to their delegation.

Shannon: That's right. They put [inaudible] and representatives of the Heritage Foundation on their delegation…which focuses on women's rights. And it's the biggest global gathering that takes place annually on gender equality and women's rights. The outcomes of the Commission on the Status of Women is an agreement by governments that tackled specific gender equality issues and makes recommendations on what they should do to address them…putting groups that not only explicitly were not supportive of gender equality, but take a very hostile position to women, girls, and gender nonconforming people, and try to eliminate, you know, any reference to sexual and reproductive health, to abortion, to even the term “gender equality” in UN agreements. It makes a very, very strong statement. I think at that first conference, the Trump administration disavowed the prior positions of the Obama administration and talks about how they were a “pro-life country”, which is obviously counter to the laws that we have here in the US around abortion, in particular. It was really jarring to see them come in and take such an aggressive posture, right? From the very beginning, since then, as what systematically to try and eliminate references to “gender “in UN agreements, sexual and reproductive health, reproductive rights, any delineation of services, comprehensive sexuality education, in all sorts of UN agreements. And so for the large part, there has not been success in doing it.

Jennie: Yeah, that's definitely the good news is that they have not been successful, but it is shocking the ways that they really go after sexual and reproductive health and rights in any forum, even places where you would think it is not appropriate or would be just basic. Like it makes me think of when the UN security council was having the vote on rape as a weapon of war and the US was fighting sexual and reproductive health language in that.

Shannon: Yeah, that's right. And that's the one time in these negotiations where the US has actually succeeded in eliminating a reference to sexual and reproductive health, which you think would be essential for survivors of sexual violence. Right? And the only reason that they succeeded in that context was because they had veto power. And I think it's a real, you know, display of how those that are willing to go for one in order to, you know, impose their ideological agenda on the rest of the world, but also just how isolated that they are. The only reason that they were able to, you know, secure elimination of …in this resolution was because of that veto power. You know, one thing that the US has tried to do is to build a coalition of countries to oppose sexual and reproductive health, and it's actually been fairly laughable. So there've been a few key moments. So it was a bit last couple of years where health has been a top priority on the global agenda, not just now in light of COVID-19, but last year there was a resolution that was adopted by the general assembly, a ministerial declaration focusing on universal health coverage. Now universal health coverage is something that governments agreed to achieve in 2015 as part of the Sustainable Development Goals, which is a global agreement. It has everything from gender equality to education, to climate change, and governments made universal health coverage a key priority. And when we talk about universal health coverage, it's three things. It's making sure that there is access to critical health services, protecting people from financial ruin or some poverty as a result of accessing healthcare--so there's financial protection element-- and ensuring access to essential medicine and vaccines as well. And the Trump administration during that negotiation worked really hard to, again, limit any reference to sexual and reproductive health and rights. They were unsuccessful, but then, you know, threatened that they would be pulling together a big coalition of countries to disassociate from it. And in the end, they had less than 20 of, you know, the 196 members of the United Nations or so doing their statements. So you, they've made this a top foreign policy priority. They have put a lot on the line in order to try to underline sexual and reproductive health. The good news is that what they've done as a result of this process is isolate themselves and undermine their ability to influence other policy priorities for the United States. So even though, you know, clearly we disagree with it, like their fight around sexual and reproductive health and rights. like I can kind of get--I mean, not really--you know, they're against abortion, but some of the other areas that they've really attacked has been less clear, like attacking comprehensive sexuality education. Like that just seems basic. You should want kids to have comprehensive sexuality education. I think the evidence is clear that when kids have access to comprehensive sexuality education, they make better choices for themselves. And in countries that have really embraced comprehensive sexuality education and making sure that young people have access to sexual and reproductive health services, like the Netherlands, they have some of the lowest rates of adolescent pregnancy, and yet people tend to stop having sex much later as a result. So we know very well that sexuality education, especially when it centers gender equality and human rights and questions of power within relationships, WHO has the very impact of it. The Trump administration says that it wants to prevent people from having sex, but at the same time, it's one of the things that they most vehemently oppose. And again, you know, that they've met with very little success and trying to limit agreements that referenced the importance of sexuality education in global agreement. But what they have done is really center the role of parents and put the rights of parents over the rights of children and adolescents. And I think that this is something that is not just a Trump administration priority, that has been a priority of the Republican party in previous Republican administrations as well. But I think it has been enforced in a vehement way this time.

Jennie: Yeah, definitely. I think, you know, when it's, again, some of the stuff is really reflected in the domestic space as well. It's just something else to see that they're really exporting US policy and trying to enforce it on everybody. And I think one of the other things, you know, that you mentioned a little bit, but maybe it's worth digging in on, is the language around gender and changing a lot of the gender references to “women.”

Shannon: Yeah. I think that this is another area where what they've done domestically is narrowed in their policies and the positions internationally as well. So, you know, we know how the Trump administration has attacked the rights of transgender individuals in particular. And what they have argued with is the use of the term “gender” in international agreements. We fully understood that can be used to write for transgender and other gender nonconforming people in a way that they disagree with. And so they have tried to systematically remove references to the term “gender” in UN agreements. And again, it’s been met with fairly limited success, but, you know, we have seen them prior to opposing the use of the terms remain silent and have instead focused on violence against women and goals. We've seen them try to remove references to the term “gender equality”, which is long standing and really well understood, and replace it to “equality between women and men” and in doing so is really tied to reinforce binary ideas of sex and gender, and also, you know, heteronormativity policy positions at the UN. Like I said, they've been largely unsuccessful because “gender” has been a term that the UN has been using for essentially its entire existence and is well understood in these global policy spaces. But I think it's an example of how the US has tried to take some of these concepts and create confusion about them and in doing so, you know, undoing how we're able to use them and talk about them. In some of these spaces, one of their latest tricks is to say that sexual and reproductive health is a confusing topic and something that's not well-defined or understood. But, you know, as I mentioned, sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights for example, were defined in 1994, but the negative impacts of the US using these kinds of terms is that some other countries that are also not big champions of sexual and reproductive health and rights like Saudi Arabia or Yemen, these are some of the countries that the US advocates in lockstep with around some of these issues, sort of like picking up on the talking points and using it as theirs, which further creates confusion when there really shouldn't be. There hasn't been confusion about these terms and what they mean.

Jennie: Yeah. And again, it's another one of those… you see the “not clearly defined “really coming back to, I mean, kind of domestically, but with the Unalienable Rights Commission where they're saying human rights are, you know, not well-defined, we need to get back to unalienable rights. So I think it has wide-ranging consequences of trying to say these words don't have meaning.

Shannon: Right. Exactly.

Jennie: Okay. And I think, you know, another place that we should really talk about is something that's been in the news much more lately, which is the attacks on the World Health Organization and the US talking about how they're going to step out from the World Health Organization. Do we want to touch on that a little bit?

Shannon: Sure. I'd say early in the Trump administration, there was a memo from the domestic policy council that was leaked to the press. And in that memo, they sort of like outlined their policy priorities on a range of issues. And from that, it was really clear that they had, you know, a singular focus on sexual and reproductive health and undermining agreements on that. And the attacks on multilateralism, as I mentioned previously, but they also think about who as an organization that they wanted to defund when they said at that time that the global health security work of who was ineffective and that it was a corrupted hostile bureaucracy. So I think it's important to frame it in this context and to recognize that the Trump administration and the religious right has had their sights on defunding WHO for a long time, and a lot of the attacks on WHO from anti-choice organizations in particular started around the time that the World Health Organization issued its first policy guidance on addressing unsafe abortion and giving their advice to governments on the best evidence around policy and programs to ensure access to abortion services, to the full extent of national laws. So since that time they've really been gunning for the World Health Organization, but their advocacy had mostly fallen on deaf ears because the World Health Organization itself it's a critical body, right? The World Health Organization is responsible for coordinating responses to global pandemics and ensuring that those responses cross borders, that the learning from them is shared. And that when pandemics likes COVID-19, with a purpose for which this organization was created, that we are able to respond to it in a way that minimizes its impact and ensures that the treatments, diagnostics, and vaccines that is developing a response, that global public goods and can be shared across countries. So the World Health Organization is also responsible for synthesizing evidence and providing best kinds of evidence to countries about a range of health issues, everything from infectious diseases to chronic conditions, such as diabetes and heart disease, as well as sexual and reproductive health and rights. And then the third thing that the World Health Organization does, that's really critical, is providing humanitarian response and services, um, in places where there are humanitarian crises and conflict. So it's a really critical organization. It plays a critical role on the global stage, but precisely because of their work on sexual and reproductive health and rights, they have been a target of the religious right. Um, for quite some time, this is the first time that they've really been able to gain traction on their attacks on WHO. And it's something that I think on a number of levels, one, the US has been historically the biggest donor to the World Health Organization .And then because of that has had disproportionate power and influencing on WHO policy and has used that power in a way that has not only benefited Americans, but has ensured the strength of the organization and then it's influence around the globe. And so for the US and the Trump administration to be leaving their seat at the table and their ability to influence global policy, it's just an… like if you have the most powerful voice at the table, why give up that? But to, you know, the other thing is that the withdrawal of funding from this organization, particularly at this point in time is going to be devastating for the organization's ability to carry out its roles, but also, you know, provide support for health systems around the globe. And so it's going to be rather devastating. And for administration that says that it prioritizes the, you know, the health and wellbeing of people and life, this is a policy position that's going to have really devastating consequences. And I would say, not just for people in the global south, but also for Americans who will no longer be able to benefit from some of the work that WHO does.

Jennie: Yeah. There's something especially disturbing that they're using a pandemic too and using a pandemic is the reason and the timing to dissociate from the WHO.

Shannon: Yeah. And it's certainly cynical too, right. Because, you know, I don't believe that the pandemic response is the reason why that trying to withdraw from WHO at this particular point in time. It just gives them an excuse. But it's also, I think, you know, a cover for the fact that the Trump administration, you know, was getting firsthand information from WHO at the same time WHO was getting it and was getting the advice from WHO that, you know, it was getting to all countries and also decided not to follow it. And, you know, had the Trump administration followed the advice they had gotten from WHO about how to contain COVID-19 at the earliest stages, we wouldn't have seen more than a hundred thousand Americans dead today. Um, and so it's using this pandemic as a, you know, a cynical way to attack an institution that they've had their sights on for a long time, but also, you know, with devastating consequences for the lives of Americans.

Jennie: Those attacks definitely provides real world consequences. But, you know, looking at these attacks on sexual and reproductive health and rights, it's all policy and whatever. So why should it matter? Why does, why should it matter to us?

Shannon: It matters to us because the policy that comes out of the UN often influences the policies that are made by other countries and in particular countries-- when they're setting their priorities for development. So the US might not, but many other countries take what comes out of the UN very seriously, then use it as a way to develop their own policies. And they also report against what it is that they're doing to implement those policies in the global level. So these institutions at the United Nations mentor agreements that come out of the United Nations to include sexual and reproductive health and rights because is really important and it signals to governments…1) that this is important, and 2) they should be doing something about it. And many governments take those recommendations really seriously and try to put in place programs and policies and funding to support achieving those objectives.

Jennie: So with all of this in mind, what can listeners do? Is there any actions they can take to fight back around some of this stuff?

Shannon: Well, I think, you know, one thing that is really important is that Congress has the ability to counter some of what the Trump administration is trying to do in this space. And so working with Congress to try and encourage your members to be supportive of the World Health Organization and US leadership in global spaces, it would be one thing to call all your representatives, tell them that they should be taking action to ensure that the Trump administration can't continue to undermine sexual and reproductive health and rights and the rights of women, girls, and gender nonconforming people in some of these global spaces. You know, Congress can appropriate money for these institutions like UNFPA and the World Health Organization that the administration then has to pay. So that would be one thing. The other thing too, would just be educating yourself about some of the agreements that the UN has made. The Sustainable Development Goals, for example, are a global set of agreements that both countries, but also cities are committed to. Governments can have a role just as national governments can in implementing some of these agreements. So working with your local governments to get commitments. New York City, for example, has a whole action plan on achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and a number of other cities across the US do as well. And then there are US based organizations that are focused on raising funding for, and supporting these multilateral institutions that are so important, including Friends of UNFPA and the US Committee for UN Women and other organizations. Then finally, supporting organizations that advocate in these spaces and try to counter the harmful impacts of the US government is also really important. So organizations like yours, Jennie, or like the International Women's Health Coalition that are active in some of these spaces is also really an important thing to do

Jennie: Shannon, thank you so much for being here today.

Shannon: Thank you. It was a great conversation. I'm happy to be able to participate. Thank you.

Jennie: Thanks for listening everyone. And we'll see you on our next episode of RePROS Fight Back. For more information, including show notes from this episode and previous episodes, please visit our website at reprosfightback.com. You can also find us on Facebook and Twitter at RePROS Fight Back, or on Instagram at reprosfb. If you like our show, please help others find it by sharing it with your friends and subscribing, rating and reviewing us on iTunes. Thanks for listening.

take action