The intimate labour of internationalism: maternalist humanitarians and the mid-twentieth century family planning movement

Abstract

This article moves past high politics and the most prominent activists to explore the daily, intimate practice of international movement building by mid-level fieldworkers within the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) during its first decade of existence (1952–62). It illustrates how fieldworkers and the IPPF’s practitioner-oriented newsletter Around the World attempted to bridge the ideological and geographic diversity of the family planning movement and connect with advocates around the world through an emotive narrative of suffering, love, and global humanity, reinforced by affective bonds and women’s volunteerism. The story of global family planning must thus be seen not only as part of the history of eugenics, population control, and feminism, but also as part of the longer trajectory of maternalist humanitarianism. This mid-twentieth century version of maternalist humanitarianism built on earlier traditions but also incorporated concepts of human rights, critiques of dominant gender and sexual norms, and an official commitment to local self-determination in the context of decolonization movements. Still, the organization was plagued by the problems that shape humanitarianism more broadly, including the difficulty of moving past colonialist discourses, deeply rooted feelings of racial superiority, and the contradictions inherent in attempts to impose an impossible ideal of political neutrality in a politically complex world. Looking at the history of global family planning from this perspective thus helps us understand how the different traditions, intimate relationships, and practical experiences mid-level actors bring to their work shape the broader process of international movement building, beyond high-level political and ideological activism.

Missing in action: a scoping review of gender as the overlooked component in decolonial discourses

“…Papers that discussed (de)coloniality and engaged with gender covered a range of global health issues, from specific topic areas to broader concerns about governance and knowledge. Six papers focused on sexual and reproductive health and rights19–24 with a further two papers specifically on maternal health,25 26 while five papers focused on mental health,27–31 three papers discussed health in humanitarian settings,30 32 33 two papers focused on planetary health34 35 and one paper focused on non-communicable diseases 36. Five papers had a focus on pandemics, ranging from prevention37 to transmission38 to response,39–41 and one highlighted the challenges surrounding the production and distribution of vaccines 42.…”

“…44 Furthermore, the international nature of global health means that considerations of the contemporary political economy must extend beyond national borders, practically demonstrated by the way in which the Global Gag Rule (GGR) impacts the funding, service implementation and agency of organisations in receipt of US global health assistance during Republican administrations. As observed by Lane, Ayeb-Karlsson and Shahvisi, the GGR not only imposes restrictions on grant recipients Table 1 The final set of 53 papers reviewed, categorised by nature of engagement with gender Papers that discussed (de)coloniality and gender (n=27) Papers that discussed the intersection of (de)coloniality and gender (n=26) Abouzeid et al 53 Bourbonnais 24 Capella and Jadhav 27 Chapman et al 25 Cullen et al 43 Demir 61 Dhar 28 Douedari et al 32 Egid et al 47 Eni et al 46 Finkel et al 58 Giuliani et al 65 Irfan and St Jean 38 Khan et al 70 Kronick, Jarvis and Kirmayer 30 Lazaridou and Fernando 31 Mbali and Rucell 62 Montgomery 51 Olivar et al 40 Olusanya, Mallewa and Ogbo 57 Price et al 67 Rambukwella 41 Sekalala et al 42 Skopec et al 63 Smith, Penados and Gahman 49 Voller et al 54 Walsh, Brugha and Byrne 52 Abimbola et al 69 Báez and Soto-Lafontaine 20 Baquero, Benavidez Fernández and Acero Aguilar 34 Besson 60 Bhandal 64 Brisbois, Spiegel and Harris 55 Büyüm et al 59 Gumbonzvanda, Gumbonzvanda and Burgess 48 Hankivsky…”