[GA - PASSED] Action on Period Poverty

Status
Not open for further replies.
Magecastle

Magecastle

Wolf of the North
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
Magecastle Embassy Building A5
Discord
green_canine
ga.jpg

Action on Period Poverty
Category: Social Justice | Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Tinhampton | Onsite Topic​

Concerned that many member states have not yet acted to expand access to menstrual products, which has led to menstruating students missing out on billions of hours of education every year (which can severely affect their life prospects) and low-income menstruators often having to use ineffective substitutes or even steal menstrual products, to name just two examples, and

Recognising the need to end this travesty once and for all in developed and developing nations alike...

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. mandates that:
    1. all hospitals in member states provide menstrual products for patients in genuine need who request them and staff,
    2. all educational establishments in member states that do not solely educate or employ non-menstruators provide menstrual products for staff and students,
    3. all employers in member states with toilet facilities which they expect to be used by menstruators provide menstrual products in those toilets for employees and customers,
    4. all other operators of public toilet facilities likely to be used by menstruators in member states provide menstrual products in those toilets,
    5. those menstrual products described in this Article be accessible, usable as intended by any menstruators foreseen to need them, free of charge, and first made available within six months of the passage of this resolution, and that
    6. locations providing menstrual products under Articles a(i-iv) also provide bins designed for the safe disposal of those products,
  2. requires each member state to:
    1. raise awareness among its inhabitants of Article a's provisions,
    2. provide that those students receiving a curriculum which contains every element of a basic education learn about periods in terms of biology, society, and physical and mental health, and
    3. ensure that those entities within their jurisdiction described in Articles a(i-iv) comply with Article a; including by providing logistical and financial assistance to help them comply, and
  3. recommends that members consider funding or otherwise supporting the provision of free and accessible menstrual supplies in other contexts, and
  4. encourages members to work with civil society to end the stigmas surrounding periods.
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

ForAgainstAbstainPresent
71003
 
Last edited:
Overview

This proposal seeks to increase access to menstrual products, by mandating the universal and free provision of menstrual products in areas including hospitals, educational establishments and public toilets. It would also require employers with toilet facilities to provide free menstrual products to employees and customers who may require them. The resolution also establishes a requirement for those providing free menstrual products to provide bins to safely dispose of those products. Finally, member states would be required to provide basic education about periods for students.

Recommendation
While the aim of the proposal is one the Ministry supports, there are issues with the proposal which would limit its effectiveness. Due to its broad language, the proposal would require online schools to provide free menstrual products to students. This would be impractical and likely logistically impossible for online schools. Additionally, the wording of Section a.ii is poor, as it remains very ambiguous on when a patient would be "in genuine need", thus allowing for easy circumvention of the mandate.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote Against the General Assembly Resolution at vote, "Action on Period Poverty".

This IFV Recommendation was written in collaboration with our World Assembly Legislative League partners.
 
Last edited:
For

(EDIT: No longer has resident nation in TNP) - SR (2023-03-01)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For

I would ask, however, why "or" is used in a(ii) and why the conditions in a(iii) and a(iv) ("expect" vs "likely") differ.
 
nvxl:
I would ask, however, why "or" is used in a(ii)...
Click to expand...
So that schools meet the needs of both menstruating staff and students.

nvxl:
...and why the conditions in a(iii) and a(iv) ("expect" vs "likely") differ.
Click to expand...
Businesses with physical presences can plan for their toilets to be used by non-menstruators. Installers of unmanned portakabins... cannot.
 
Present. The barrier I need to get through is whether free provision of such products would cause severe economic inefficiencies and whether such an impact is worth it.

Vote changed, see new post.
 
Last edited:
Fregerson:
Present. The barrier I need to get through is whether free provision of such products would cause severe economic inefficiencies and whether such an impact is worth it.
Click to expand...
I don't understand how an approach that involved, like, checking people's incomes, or whatever you propose for the needs-based approach you have advocated for, would be more efficient than providing these products for free.
 
Comfed:
I don't understand how an approach that involved, like, checking people's incomes, or whatever you propose for the needs-based approach you have advocated for, would be more efficient than providing these products for free.
Click to expand...
Simply because commercial companies no longer find it profitable to produce such products. This leads to 2 results: 1. Companies unilitarally scale back on the production of such products to focus on profit-generating ones; or 2. governments spending lots of money providing subsidies to prop up the production of these products. In the case of the former, this puts a strain on the supply of the products and might possibly lead to a shortage (or a rationing scheme, but surely that is not realistic). In the case of the latter, for governments who are in a bad fiscal position, especially those in developing nations with less-than-ideal economic circumstances, its basically one more burden added into the list of social benefits the government is already providing.

A needs-based approach doesn't have to be that difficult. Ideally it would be a machine that just scans an equivalent of an identification, checks a database, and then dispenses the product. Realistically, it could come in the form of like, coupons given to those that need it that could be exchanged for such products at shops.
 
Last edited:
To be clear, this resolution does not require that menstrual products be available free of charge in all times, places and situations; only as prescribed by Articles a(i-iv). Their producers may still profitably sell them to wholesalers and by supermarkets in designated aisles, for instance.
 
Last edited:
Understand that, but in nations with strong medical infrastructure, going to the hospital may be easier than going to the shopping centre ;)

EDIT: Or at least if they go to a public toilet facility
 
Last edited:
Fregerson:
Understand that, but in nations with strong medical infrastructure, going to the hospital may be easier than going to the shopping centre ;)

EDIT: Or at least if they go to a public toilet facility
Click to expand...
Somebody who'd just like a couple of tampons at hand and doesn't have any major medical issues is not a "patient in genuine need" of menstrual products.
 
Last edited:
Tinhampton:
To be clear, this resolution does not require that menstrual products be available free of charge in all times, places and situations; only as prescribed by Articles a(i-iv). Their producers may still profitably sell them to wholesalers and by supermarkets in designated aisles, for instance.
Click to expand...

If this is implemented in real life, I would assume that for minimum compliance purposes only the cheapest sanitary napkin would be used, at about US$0.05 per piece. Similar to toilets that offer one-ply toilet paper. The burden is not huge financially.
 
Last edited:
Tinhampton:
So that schools meet the needs of both menstruating staff and students.
Click to expand...

The way I read it, "educational establishments [...] that do not solely educate or employ non-menstruators" implies that only one of the conditions is required, as in a school which only educates non-menstruators, but does have menstruating staff, would not be required to comply with the provision. At best it's ambiguous, whereas using "and" would disambiguate it sufficiently.

Tinhampton:
Businesses with physical presences can plan for their toilets to be used by non-menstruators. Installers of unmanned portakabins... cannot.
Click to expand...

I suppose, I just thought it was odd to make the distinction in wording between the two.
 
Against
Mostly based on national sovereignty and I do not believe this should be handled by the WA. Each member nation should be free to tackle this issue as they see fit. Moreover this places an undue burden on governments that is both impractical and does not take into account each nations own circumstances and beliefs.

(EDIT: No longer has resident nation in TNP) - SR (2023-03-01)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Simone_Republic:
If this is implemented in real life, I would assume that for minimum compliance purposes only the cheapest sanitary napkin would be used, at about US$0.05 per piece. Similar to toilets that offer one-ply toilet paper. The burden is not huge financially.
Click to expand...

I mean, I am hesitant between "this is minimal cost and seems like a good idea" vs "this seems too local an issue".

Voting Present For.
 
Last edited:
Against after hearing new comments from fellow WALL allies. In particular, this one from Europeia (quoting Maowi from discord):
We like the idea but Lime brought up a couple of potential wording issues. One is that section two requires "educational establishments" to provide menstrual products, but there doesn't seem to be an exception for online schools etc, and the requirement would be pretty unreasonable in those situations. Section two also refers to establishments "that do not solely educate or employ non-menstruators" - and while that inclusive language is good, there is the concern that it could lead to invasions of privacy e.g. would a boys' school have to ask a trans male pupil whether they menstruate/expect the pupil to inform the school?
Click to expand...
 
I change my vote to PRESENT. I am for the proposal in principle and believe there are more pros than cons however the wording concerns cause me to not be able to give mg full support for this proposal.
 
Fregerson:
Against after hearing new comments from fellow WALL allies. In particular, this one from Europeia (quoting Maowi from discord):
Click to expand...
A. I don't believe that students at virtual schools should be deprived of the access to menstrual products enjoyed by those at physical schools.

B. Schools are not expected or required to make exact stocktakes of how many of their students/staff menstruate. They must merely have enough for everyone. There is nothing wrong with:
  1. co-educational schools dividing their population by two, then multiplying it by the number of menstrual products needed,
  2. female-only schools multiplying their population by the number of menstrual products needed, and
  3. male-only schools offering a nominal number of menstrual products just-in-case,
in order to fulfil the Article b mandate.
 
Tinhampton:
A. I don't believe that students at virtual schools should be deprived of the access to menstrual products enjoyed by those at physical schools.

B. Schools are not expected or required to make exact stocktakes of how many of their students/staff menstruate. They must merely have enough for everyone. There is nothing wrong with:
  1. co-educational schools dividing their population by two, then multiplying it by the number of menstrual products needed,
  2. female-only schools multiplying their population by the number of menstrual products needed, and
  3. male-only schools offering a nominal number of menstrual products just-in-case,
in order to fulfil the Article b mandate.
Click to expand...

For what I consider to be a relatively minor issue that barely warrants the attention of the GA, we seem to have spent an inordinate amount of time considering this issue.
 
Last edited:
Chipoli:
I change my vote to PRESENT. I am for the proposal in principle and believe there are more pros than cons however the wording concerns cause me to not be able to give mg full support for this proposal.
Click to expand...

I am now AGAINST. While I still support it in principle, I would like this resolution to be improved further.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top