MSF responds to needs for the termination of pregnancy, including on request (TPR); it is part of the organization’s work aimed at reducing maternal mortality and suffering; and preventing unsafe abortions in the countries where we work. Following the publication of “Why don’t humanitarian organizations provide safe abortion care?” we offer an insight into MSF’s experience over the past few years. The article looks at the legal concerns and proposes that the importance of addressing maternal mortality should replace them and the operational set-up and action organized in a way that mitigates risks. MSF took a policy decision on safe abortion care in 2004; the fact that care did not expand rapidly to relevant MSF projects came as a surprise, reflecting the important weight social norms around abortion have everywhere. The need to engage in an open dialogue with staff, relevant medical actors and at community level became more obvious. Finally the article looks some key lessons that have emerged for the organization as part of the effort to prevent ill health, maternal death and suffering caused by unwanted pregnancy and unsafe abortion.

Humanitarian crises, driven by disasters, conflict, and disease epidemics, have profound effects on society, including on people’s health and well-being. Occurrences of conflict by state and nonstate actors have increased in the last 2 decades: by the end of 2018, an estimated 41.3 million internally displaced persons and 20.4 million refugees were reported worldwide, representing a 70% increase from 2010. Although public health response for people affected by humanitarian crisis has improved in the last 2 decades, health actors have made insufficient progress in the use of evidence-based interventions to reduce neonatal mortality. Indeed, on average, conflict-affected countries report higher neonatal mortality rates and lower coverage of key maternal and newborn health interventions compared with non–conflict-affected countries. As of 2018, 55.6% of countries with the highest neonatal mortality rate (≥30 per 1000 live births) were affected by conflict and displacement. Systematic use of new evidence-based interventions requires the availability of a skilled health workforce and resources as well as commitment of health actors to implement interventions at scale. A review of the implementation of the Helping Babies Survive training program in 3 refugee responses and protracted conflict settings identify that this training is feasible, acceptable, and effective in improving health worker knowledge and competency and in changing newborn care practices at the primary care and hospital level. Ultimately, to improve neonatal survival, in addition to a trained health workforce, reliable supply and health information system, community engagement, financial support, and leadership with effective coordination, policy, and guidance are required.

Twenty-one years ago, a global consortium of like-minded institutions designed the landmark Minimum Initial Service Package (MISP) for sexual and reproductive health (SRH) to guide national and international humanitarian first responders in preventing morbidity and mortality at the onset of chaos, destruction, and high insecurity caused by disasters or conflicts. Since then, the MISP has undergone limited change and has become an international reference in humanitarian response. This article discusses our perspectives regarding the 2018 changes to the MISP that have created division among humanitarian field practitioners, academics, advocates, and development agencies. With more than 50 pages, the new MISP chapter dilutes key guidance and messages on the most life-saving activities, leaving actors with excessive room for interpretation as to which priority activities need to be first implemented. Consequently, non-life-saving interventions may take precedence over essential ones. Insecurity, scarce human and financial resources, logistics constrains, and other limitations imposed by field reality at the onset of a crisis must be considered. We strongly recommend that an institution with the mandate, legitimacy, and technical expertise in the review of guidelines reexamines the 2018 edition of the MISP. We urge experienced first-line responders, national actors, and relevant agencies to join efforts to ensure that the MISP remains focused on a very limited set of essential activities and supplies that are pragmatic, field-oriented, and, most importantly, immediately life-saving for people in need.

Background More than 100 million people were forcibly displaced over the last decade, including millions of refugees displaced across international borders. Although refugee health and well-being has gained increasing attention from researchers in recent years, few studies have examined refugee birth outcomes or newborn health on a regional or global scale. This study uses routine health information system data to examine neonatal mortality burden and trends in refugee camps between 2006 and 2017. Methods Refugee population and mortality data were exported from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Health Information System (HIS) database. Tableau was used to export the data. Stata was used for data cleaning and statistical analysis. Neonatal mortality burdens and trends in refugee camps were analyzed and compared to national and subnational neonatal mortality rates captured by household surveys. Findings One hundred fifty refugee camps in 21 countries were included in this study, with an average population of 1,725,433 between 2006 and 2017. A total of 663,892 live births and 3382 neonatal deaths were captured during this period. Annual country-level refugee camp neonatal mortality rates (NMR) ranged from 12 to 56 neonatal deaths per 1000 live births. In most countries and years where national population-based surveys are available, refugee camp NMR as reported in the UNHCR HIS was lower than that of the immediate host community. Conclusion The UNHCR HIS provides insights into the neonatal mortality burden among refugees in camp settings and issues to consider in design and use of routine health information systems to monitor neonatal health in sub-national populations. Increased visibility of neonatal deaths and stillbirths among displaced populations can drive advocacy and inform decisions needed to strengthen health systems. Efforts to count every stillbirth and neonatal death are critical, as well as improvements to reporting systems and mechanisms for data review within broader efforts to improve the quality of neonatal care practices within and outside of health facilities.

Background Abortion-related complications are one of the five main causes of maternal mortality. However, research about abortion is very limited in fragile and conflict-affected settings. Our study aims to describe the magnitude and severity of abortion-related complications in two referral hospitals supported by Médecins Sans Frontières and located in such settings in northern Nigeria and Central African Republic (CAR). Methods We used a methodology similar to the World Health Organization (WHO) near-miss approach adapted in the WHO multi-country study on abortion (WHO-MCS-A). We conducted a cross-sectional study in the two hospitals providing comprehensive emergency obstetric care. We used prospective medical records’ reviews of women presenting with abortion-related complications between November 2019 and July 2021. We used descriptive analysis and categorized complications into four mutually exclusive categories of increasing severity. Results We analyzed data from 520 and 548 women respectively in Nigerian and CAR hospitals. Abortion complications represented 4.2% (Nigerian hospital) and 19.9% (CAR hospital) of all pregnancy-related admissions. The severity of abortion complications was high: 103 (19.8%) and 34 (6.2%) women were classified as having severe maternal outcomes (near-miss cases and deaths), 245 (47.1%) and 244 (44.5%) potentially life-threatening, 39 (7.5%) and 93 (17.0%) moderate, and 133 (25.6%) and 177 (32.3%) mild complications, respectively in Nigerian and CAR hospitals. Severe bleeding/hemorrhage was the main type of complication in both settings (71.9% in the Nigerian hospital, 57.8% in the CAR hospital), followed by infection (18.7% in the Nigerian hospital, 27.0% in the CAR hospital). Among the 146 women (Nigerian hospital) and 231 women (CAR hospital) who did not report severe bleeding or hemorrhage before or during admission, anemia was more frequent in the Nigerian hospital (66.7%) compared to the CAR hospital (37.6%). Conclusion Our data suggests high severity of abortion-related complications in these two referral facilities of fragile and conflict-affected settings. Factors that could contribute to this high severity in these contexts include greater delays in accessing post-abortion care, decreased access to contraceptive and safe abortion care that result in increased unsafe abortions; as well as increased food insecurity leading to iron-deficiencies and chronic anaemia. The results highlight the need for better access to safe abortion care, contraception, and high quality postabortion care to prevent and manage complications of abortion in fragile and conflict-affected settings.

Over the past ten years, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has provided medical care to almost 118,000 victims of sexual violence. Integrating related care into MSF general assistance to populations affected by crisis and conflicts has presented a considerable institutional struggle and continues to be a challenge. Tensions regarding the role of MSF in providing care to victims of sexual violence and when facing the multiple challenges inherent in dealing with this crime persist. An overview of MSF's experience and related reflection aims to share with the reader, on the one hand, the complexity of the issue, and on the other, the need to continue fighting for the provision of adequate medical care for victims of sexual violence, which despite the limitations is feasible.

Unwanted pregnancy and unsafe abortion contribute significantly to the burden of maternal suffering, ill health and death in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). This qualitative study examines the vulnerabilities of women and girls regarding unwanted pregnancy and abortion, to better understand their health-seeking behaviour and to identify barriers that hinder them from accessing care. Data were collected in three different areas in eastern DRC, using in-depth individual interviews, group interviews and focus group discussions. Respondents were purposively sampled. All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcriptions were screened for relevant information, manually coded and analysed using qualitative content analysis. Perceptions and attitudes towards unwanted pregnancy and abortion varied across the three study areas. In North Kivu, interviews predominantly reflected the view that abortions are morally reprehensible, which contrasts the widespread practice of abortion. In Ituri many perceive abortions as an appropriate solution for reducing maternal mortality. Legal constraints were cited as a barrier for health professionals to providing adequate medical care. In South Kivu, the general view was one of opposition to abortion, with some tolerance towards breastfeeding women. The main reasons women have abortions are related to stigma and shame, socio-demographics and finances, transactional sex and rape. Contrary to the prevailing critical narrative on abortion, this study highlights a significant need for safe abortion care services. The proverb “Better dead than being mocked” shows that women and girls prefer to risk dying through unsafe abortion, rather than staying pregnant and facing stigma for an unwanted pregnancy.

No abstract