Feminist Global Health Security (Oxford Studies in Gender and International Relations)

When Zika made headlines in 2016, images of women cradling babies affected with microcephaly spread across the media and pulled on heartstrings. But, as this book argues, whilst this outbreak was about women and babies, this outbreak also highlighted the lack of gendered considerations in global health security. The policy response to Zika focused on limiting the spread of the virus through domestic and civic cleaning to remove mosquitoes and by asking women to defer pregnancy. Both of these actions are inherently gendered, placing the burden of responsibility for stemming the spread of disease on women. By taking Zika as its primary case but also touching on COVID-19, Feminist Global Health Security asks what the policy response to disease outbreaks tell us about the role of women in global health security. More broadly, what would global health policy look like if it were to take gender seriously, and how would this impact global disease control? Beyond raising questions of gender equity, Clare Wenham also considers global health security's lack of consideration for sustainability in epidemic preparedness and response. Wenham argues that global health security in general has thus far lacked a substantive feminist engagement, with the result that the very policies created to manage an outbreak of disease disproportionately fail to protect women. We know that women have biological pre-disposition and social vulnerability to contracting a number of infectious diseases, making them more susceptible to infection. Yet, the dominant gender-blind policy narrative of global health security has created pathways which focus on protecting the international spread of disease and state economies, rather than protecting those who are most likely to be affected. As such, the state-based structure of global health security provides the fault line for global health security's failure to engage women. This book highlights the ways in which women are disadvantaged by global health security policy, through engagement with feminist international relations concepts of visibility, social and stratified reproduction, intersectionality, and structural violence. Wenham argues that it was no coincidence that poor, Black women living in low-quality housing were the most affected by the Zika outbreak and will continue to be so amid all epidemics, until meaningful engagement with gender is incorporated into global health security. As many news reports have made clear during COVID, there has been a recent sea change in thinking about the secondary effects of infectious disease control policy on women. However, we have yet to see this reflected in global health policy. When Zika made headlines in 2016, images of women cradling babies affected with microcephaly spread across the media and pulled on heartstrings. But, as this book argues, whilst this outbreak was about women and babies, this outbreak also highlighted the lack of gendered considerations in global health security. The policy response to Zika focused on limiting the spread of the virus through domestic and civic cleaning to remove mosquitoes and by asking women to defer pregnancy. Both of these actions are inherently gendered, placing the burden of responsibility for stemming the spread of disease on women.By taking Zika as its primary case but also touching on COVID-19, Feminist Global Health Security asks what the policy response to disease outbreaks tell us about the role of women in global health security. More broadly, what would global health policy look like if it were to take gender seriously, and how would this impact global disease control? Beyond raising questions of gender equity, Clare Wenham also considers global health security's lack of consideration for sustainability in epidemic preparedness and response. Wenham argues that global health security in general has thus far lacked a substantive feminist engagement, with the result that the very policies created to manage an outbreak of disease disproportionately fail to protect women. We know that women have biological pre-disposition and social vulnerability to contracting a number of infectious diseases, making them more susceptible to infection. Yet, the dominant gender-blind policy narrative of global health security has created pathways which focus on protecting the international spread of disease and state economies, rather than protecting those who are most likely to be affected. As such, the state-based structure of global health security provides the fault line for global health security's failure to engage women.This book highlights the ways in which women are disadvantaged by global health security policy, through engagement with feminist international relations concepts of visibility, social and stratified reproduction, intersectionality, and structural violence. Wenham argues that it was no coincidence that poor, Black women living in low-quality housing were the most affected by the Zika outbreak and will continue to be so amid all epidemics, until meaningful engagement with gender is incorporated into global health security. As many news reports have made clear during COVID, there has been a recent sea change in thinking about the secondary effects of infectious disease control policy on women. However, we have yet to see this reflected in global health policy. When Zika made headlines in 2016, images of women cradling babies affected with microcephaly spread across the world. But, as this book aruges, whilst this outbreak was about women and babies, it also highlighted the lack of gendered considerations in global health security. The policy response to Zika focused on protecting states, seeking to limit the spread of the virus through domestic and civic cleaning to remove mosquitoes and by asking women to defer pregnancy. Both of these actions are inherently gendered, placing the burden of responsibility for performing health security, and in turn stemming the spread of disease and protecting the state, on women. By taking Zika as its primary case but also touching on COVID-19, Feminist Global Health Security asks what the policy response to disease outbreaks tells us about the role of women in global health security. Beyond raising questions of gender equity, Clare Wenham highlights the ways in which women are disadvantaged by global health security policy. Wenhan argues that global health security in general has thus far lacked a substantive feminist engagement, with the result that the very policies created to manage an outbreak of disease disproportionately fail to protect women. Women has biological pre-disposition and social vulnerability to contracting a number of infectious diseases. yet, the dominant gender-blind policy narrative of global health security has created pathways which focus on protecting the international spread of disease and the global econom ic system, rather than protecting those who are most likely to be affected. Not only this, but global health security further compounds existing gender inequalities in many states. As such, the state-based structure of global health security provides the fault line for meaningful engagement with women. As many news reports have made clear during COVID, many are waking up to the secondary effects of infectious disease control policy on women. However, we have yet to see this reflected in global health policy, and so women remain disadvantaged by health emergencies. -- From dust jacket "Global health security, focused on a firefighting short-term response efforts fail to consider the differential impacts of outbreaks on women. For example, the policy response to the Zika outbreak centred on limiting the spread of the vector through civic participation and asking women to defer pregnancy. Both actions are inherently gendered and reveal a distinct lack of consideration of the everyday lives of women. These policies placed women in a position whereby were blamed if they had a child born with Congenital Zika Syndrome, and at the same time governments required women to undertake invisible labour for vector control. What does this tell us about the role of women in global health security? This feminist critique of the Zika outbreak, argues that global health security has thus far lacked a substantive feminist engagement, with the result that the very policies created to manage an outbreak of disease disproportionately fail to protect women. Women are both differentially infected and affected by epidemics. Yet, the dominant policy narrative of global health security has created pathways which focus on protecting the international spread of disease to state economies, rather than protecting those who are most at risk. As such, the state-based structure of global health security provides the fault-line for global health security and women. This book highlights the ways in which women are disadvantaged by global health security policy, through engagement with feminist security studies concepts of visibility; social and stratified reproduction; intersectionality; and structural violence. It argues that it was no coincidence that poor, black women living in low quality housing were the most affected by the Zika outbreak and will continue to be so, until global health security is gender mainstreamed. More broadly, I ask what would global health policy look like if it were to take gender seriously, and how would this impact global disease control sustainability?"-- Provided by publisher