Reproductive Health in Developing Countries: Expanding Dimensions, Building SolutionsSexually transmitted diseases, unintended pregnancies, infertility, and other reproductive problems are major concerns around the world. Nowhere is this more true than in developing countries where preventable suffering frequently drops off the radar screen of First-World voters. This 1997 book from the National Research Council arm of the National Academy of Sciences describes the magnitude of these problems and what is known about the effectiveness of interventions in four areas: infection-free sex, intended pregnancies and births, healthy pregnancy and delivery, and healthy sexuality.

Guttmacher Policy ReviewThe Guttmacher Institute is one of the world’s foremost reproductive health research institutes. It is cited by conservative and liberal sources alike for its data and research on abortion, sex education, public funding of reproductive domestic and international healthcare services, and other controversial topics. This is their peer-reviewed research journal which carries the latest cutting-edge research in reproductive healthcare topics.

CDC Reproductive Health StatisticsThe CDC tracks and publishes statistical data on a wide range of reproductive health trends and etiology. Including abortion, infant health, reproductive surgery, tobacco use and pregnancy, assisted reproductive technologies, and much more. This is their home page for distributing their data.

Abortion Surveillance --- United States; 2004PDF VersionThe CDC also tracks abortion trends and etiology publishing their data annually. This is their report for year 2004. Reports from previous years are also at the CDC website.

U.S. Funding for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)This is a letter by me to Congress regarding the Bush Administration's decision to defund UNFPA under pressure from the Religious Right. In June of 2002 it was distributed to over 200 members of Congress and their staff by Population Connection and the Population Division of the Sierra Club. In it, I show that the decision was based entirely on rumor and hysteria for which no independent factual support ever existed. Within two weeks of its circulation, the U.S. State Department returned from a fact-finding mission to China where UNFPA activities were investigated. That report independently reached the same conclusion, and by late June of that year Congress had restored UNFPA funding, with an increase. Needless to say, none of this had any influence in either Far-Right circles or the White House. By mid-July, Bush vetoed the restored funding anyway. No reason other than ideology was ever provided as to why.